Datasets:

pszemraj

/

qmsum-cleaned

like 9

tr-sq-1

tr-sq-1_0

How Did Project Manager and User Interface introduce the prototype of the remote control? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

Project Manager introduced that the prototype incorporated fashion trends that people prefer fancy looking products like fruit and vegetable. After That, User Interface presented the product which looked like a banana and was bright yellow except for the blue button. The style was as simple as possible in order to fit the customers'need for simplicity. Also, the product could be curved and used both-handed with advanced chips hidden inside, which seemed quite creative and identical to iPod features. In the end, Industrial Designer commented that the remote control could be smaller in size.

tr-sq-2

tr-sq-2_0

How did Marketing design the product evaluation? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

Marketing had some evaluation criteria in mind, based on previous marketing strategy, on the latest trends, and on user preferences. The team should figure out whether their product could solve the complaints of the ugly remote control. There was a seven-point scale rating for each criterion. The team would give comments to each feature listed and agree on the final rating.

tr-sq-3

tr-sq-3_0

What did the team discuss during the product evaluation about its feature to solve customers'concerns? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

Generally speaking, the team agreed that the product was intuitive and had successfully incorporated main aims that the team had. The team believed the customers were not likely to lose the remote control since it was big and bright yellow with speech recognition. Moreover, Industrial Designer suggested adding an extra feature for the product to raise volume like hell when it was removed so far from the TV. However, the team also noted that costs should be compared when deciding to use annoying alarms or others.

tr-sq-4

tr-sq-4_0

How did the team evaluate the product about its technologically innovative features? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

To start with, the team agreed that the remote control was indeed innovative with the LCD display incorporated and the way it could be used both-handed with an alarming feature. Also, it aimed at the recent fashion trend since it looked like a banana with a special yellow colour. Although some of its features were identical to an iPod, the team believed that it was a creative design for remote control.

tr-sq-5

tr-sq-5_0

What did the team discuss about the product cost? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

Project Manager first introduced the budget and broke it down to parts like batteries, electronics, case material supplements, interface type and then button supplements. The team agreed that the push button, integrated scroll-wheel and the LCD display cost a lot but case materials were all the same. In this case, the team decided to discard the LCD since the information it could transmit could also be simply displayed on the screen. As for the recognition feature, the team decided to make it a big deal to be alarming. And lastly, the product would be pure yellow instead of a blue button.

tr-sq-6

tr-sq-6_0

What did the team say about the project and overall process? Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

The team thought they had a really great team work experience. Everyone had put efforts into the process and gave opinions to design a good remote control. Also, the process incorporated different stages and new ideas could always be added based on the market finds.

tr-gq-7

tr-gq-7_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: Yep. Soon as I get this. Okay. This is our last meeting. Um I'll go ahead and go through the minutes from the previous meeting. Uh and then we'll have a, the prototype presentation. {vocalsound} Um then we will um do an evaluation. Uh or we'll see what, what we need to have under the criteria for the evaluation. Then we'll go through the finance and see if we fall within the budget. Um then we'll do the evaluation, and then we can finish up after that with um any changes that we'll need to make, or hopefully everything will fall right in line. Um let's see, minutes from the last meeting. Um we looked at uh the the trends. We had uh the fashion trends that people want a fancy look-and-feel. It was twice as important as anything else. Um they liked fruit and vegetables in the new styles. Um and a spongy feel. So we were talking about trying to incorporate those into our prototype. Um they wanted limited buttons and simplicity. Um then we looked at the uh the method for coming up with our own remote. Um looking at other other devices. Um the iPod, we really liked the look of that. Um we also had uh the kid's remote for a simple idea. Um a two part remote, which was what were were originally looking at. Uh and then um there was talk of spee uh speech recognition um becoming more uh predominant and easier to use. But I think we've still decided not to go with that. {vocalsound} Then we looked at the components um the materials for the case, the different energy sources, the different types of chips, um and made a decision on what we were going to use to make our remote. Um and basically how, what were making for the prototype. So I'm going to leave it at that and let you guys take over. User Interface: The prototype discussion. Project Manager: The prototype yeah. Do you need a {disfmarker} this? User Interface: No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Can try to plug that in there User Interface: There is our remo {gap} the banana. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {vocalsound} yeah basically we we st went with the colour yellow. Um working on the principle of a fruit which was mentioned, it's basically designed around a banana. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Um but it would be held in such a fashion, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: where it is, obviously it wouldn't be that floppy'cause this would be hard plastic. These would be like the rubber, the rubber grips. So that's so that would hopefully help with grip, or like the ergonomics of it. Um but all the controlling would be done with this scroll wheel. You have to use your imagination a little bit. And this here represents the screen, where you, where you'd go through. Project Manager: Very nice. User Interface: And the the simplest functions would be um almost identical to an iPod, where that one way ch through channels, that way th other way through channels. Volume up and down. And then to access the more complicated functions you'd you sorta go, you press that and go through the menus. It's that that simple. That just represents the infrared uh beam. That's a simple on and off switch. Um I don't know, we could use the voice. T that blue bits should be yellow, that that'd be where the batteries would be I suppose. And um {vocalsound} that's about it. It's as simple as you, we could make it really. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: Is there anything you want to add? Industrial Designer: That's what we have there. That's plastic. Plastic covered with rubber. We might uh add some more underneath here. Maybe give it, give it a form. I mean you're supposed to hold it like that, but um just if you grab it, take it from somewhere, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Doesn't make much make much difference. Industrial Designer: you have some rub yeah. User Interface: You could work left-handed or right-handed I suppose. Industrial Designer: Exactly, {gap} use both. Might as well think about {disfmarker} User Interface: T the actual thing might be smaller. Industrial Designer: Th think about the button as well. Like either put either one {gap} one on either side or User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: What but what's that button? Industrial Designer: not do it at all. It's a quick on-off button. User Interface: Just the on and off. Project Manager: Uh,'kay. Industrial Designer: That's um Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: yeah I think it's pretty important. So you don't have to fiddle with that. Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer: Right? Um that's not um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I'd say a bit smaller would probably be nice. You wanna play with that over there. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: It's you know it's flimsy'cause it's made out of heavy Play-Doh, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Would you like to uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Pretty impressive. Project Manager: Well done. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Kind of a banana. User Interface: And whether or not it would fall into the cost {gap} everything I suppose. With the scroll and the L_C_D_. Project Manager: Well luckily we are going to find out. Or not luckily. Um do you have a marketing presentation for us. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I do. Okay. You guys are gonna help me do an evaluation of the criteria. Um. Okay. So first I'll just discuss some of the criteria that I found. Just based on the past trend reports that I was looking at earlier. And then we'll do a group evaluation of the prototype. And then we will calculate the average score to see how we did. Um so the criteria we're gonna be looking at are the complaints um that we heard from the users who were interviewed earlier. So we're gonna be doing it based on a seven point scale. And one is going to mean true, that we did actually achieve that. With seven being false, we did not achieve that. {gap}. Okay. So for the first one, we need to decide, did we solved the problem of the users who complained about an ugly remote? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound}. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think it's definitely different than anything else out there. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So if they think that what is out there is ugly, then yes I would say, I would say most definitely. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I would {gap}. Project Manager: It's bright. User Interface: It's bright. It's {disfmarker} Project Manager: It still has your traditional black. User Interface: It's curved. It's not {disfmarker} there's no sharp Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: angles to it. Project Manager: Yep, not angular. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: I'd say, when it comes to the ergonomics, the form and stuff, yes that's definitely more beautiful than your average. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: However the colour, we don't have a say in that. Marketing: Yeah I think the colours detract a little bit. {vocalsound} User Interface: Some people might say it. Yeah. Industrial Designer: That has been, that has been dictated pretty much by the company. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: So uh to answer that honestly I would rather say like uh, we have not solved the problem completely with the ugly remote because the colour is ugly, definitely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yep. Marketing: That's true. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'S nothing you can say about that. I mean I much prefer something like brushed chrome with that form. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: But {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah something more modern to go {disfmarker} a a modern colour to go with the modern form. Industrial Designer: Right. Right. It's different. You don't want your uh three feet huge L_C_D_ dis display in your living room that's hanging from the wall to be controlled with something like that. Marketing: Um okay so, do you think, since we {disfmarker} This was a a sign criteria, do you think maybe we should put it somewhere in the middle then? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Does that sound good? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What do you think? Three? Four? Project Manager: I would say Marketing: Five? Project Manager: four. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Four is fair. Okay. Project Manager: Very non-committal, four. Marketing: Okay, the second one. Did we make it simple for new users? Industrial Designer: It's very intuitive, I think yeah. User Interface: Yeah. I think that was the main aim, one of the main aims that we had. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} S give it a one. Marketing: One, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing:'kay. Okay. Um, do the controls now match the operating behaviour of the users? User Interface: Uh yeah.'Cause we've we've brought it down to basically four controls {gap} most common, which are channel and volume. Marketing: I'd say that {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: And then the other ones are just a matter of just going, just scrolling further. Project Manager: S scrolling through and selecting a few. Industrial Designer: Right. So that's a one. Marketing: So one? Project Manager: I think that's a one. Marketing: Yeah? {vocalsound} Okay. Okay um the fourth one. How about the problem of a remote being easily lost? One of the number one complaints. Industrial Designer: Something that big and that yellow you just don't lose anymore. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Whether you want to or not, you're not gonna lose it. {vocalsound} User Interface: It's bright yellow. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Bright yellow's hard to lose. But um if we were to, if we were, that, the speech recognition. That, we could maybe just use that solely for the the finding thing. That was what we'd we'd mentioned. Project Manager: So if we incorporate speech recognition into it then it could {disfmarker} User Interface: Just just to use, to find it when it was lost. But like I said, like I don't think you'd lose something so yellow so easily. Industrial Designer: Oops. Hmm. User Interface: And it's not gonna fall, like a rectangle would slip down behind things. That's gonna be a difficult shape to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well what {disfmarker} Project Manager: And it is quite bright and {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Maybe in the middle again, three or four or something? Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: S Marketing: Okay. User Interface: I mean you know {gap} loo losing things is one of those things that people can lose, I mean a million ways. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: You can pick it up and walk away with it and then you've lost it. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: That's true. Project Manager: But if we do go with the, with the speech recognition, then it, then our scale goes up quite a bit I think. Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah. You probably {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably two. You know. If we eliminate the fact that you know it's impossible to guarantee that it's not gonna be lost then User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: I'd say two. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: With the speech recognition, which of course may be changed depending on budget. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Y you could add an extra feature actually. Which makes this thing raise hell when you remove it too far from the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We could add that but that's nothing we have thought of so far. Project Manager: Which, which may be cheaper than speech recognition if it were just a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yes. User Interface: Yeah true. But I mean d just those whistling, clapping key rings you have. They're cheap. Marketing: Annoying alarm or something? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's it's {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So it can't be that Industrial Designer: Um the {disfmarker} it's based on this anti anti-theft technology for suitcases and stuff, User Interface: expensive. Project Manager: Some sort of proximity {vocalsound} {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: where you have one piece that's attached to your luggage, another piece that starts beeping. That can't cost much. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that can also easily be integrated because these things are small enough to to hide, so you have one piece, you have to glue somewhere behind your {disfmarker} stick it behind your T_V_ and the other {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} stick it on the T_V_ {gap}. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Pray that you don't accidentally lose that piece. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That'd be tough then. {vocalsound} Well also your remote would uh alarm you if somebody stole you t your television, yeah. Ran off with it without taking the beautiful remote control. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: So. Are we adding one of these two features? Industrial Designer: Let's add one of those features and say yes. {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap} gonna say {disfmarker} okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So we're {vocalsound} back to a one? User Interface: Two. Marketing: Or a two? Project Manager: Two. Industrial Designer: Two. Marketing: Two,'kay. Okay. Are we technologically innovative? Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} I'd say so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh don't get many mo remote controls with Industrial Designer: It's all just {disfmarker} User Interface: screens on. Industrial Designer: It's all just stolen technology when it comes down to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah it's stolen technology. Marketing: From iPod yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: But we have {gap}. Project Manager: But there's not a lot of yellow, there's not a lotta yellow. Industrial Designer: right Marketing: But for remotes {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Course that wasn't really {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: right User Interface: Fa Industrial Designer: right right. Project Manager: we were kinda forced to take that colour. Marketing: Two? Three? User Interface: {gap}'cause it's stolen. Project Manager: I don't know that we are that innovative, to tell you the truth. {vocalsound} User Interface: No maybe not. Industrial Designer: Yeah not really. Marketing: But how many remotes do you see like this? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: If we added the screaming factor {vocalsound} then we go up. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Not so many. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um I would say we're probably at four. Industrial Designer: Right. Marketing: Really? Okay. {vocalsound} That's gonna hurt us. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Um spongy material? Industrial Designer: Yeah well you have that, kind of, sort of. Project Manager: We have some spongy, yeah. User Interface: Yeah as much as as needed, I think. Marketing:'Kay. Industrial Designer: It's not a one though. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: One would be the whole thing Project Manager: Yeah. Because it's only got what, these parts are the grips and perhaps the back side {disfmarker} the bottom {disfmarker} the underneath on the back. Industrial Designer: to fold and stuff. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that's a four at most. Project Manager: Probably a four at most. Possibly even a five. Marketing: And lastly, did we put the fashion in electronics? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Y yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I'd say we did. Project Manager: If your fashion is b is Carmen Miranda, you betcha. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: More {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well the recent fashion is rather displayed in the in the L_C_D_ and the way you operate it than the form and the colour, User Interface: On the {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's true. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: but it definitely is {disfmarker} User Interface: Be what we were told, and they'd say yeah, definitely. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing:'Kay. Alright. Now we just gotta calculate. Six eight twelve sixteen. Seventeen divided by s User Interface: {gap}. Project Manager: Seven is {disfmarker} Marketing: Eight. Project Manager: Two point {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} two point four? User Interface: Is that some long division? No. Project Manager: Something. Marketing: Well I haven't done math in years. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: What two {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} I dunno. User Interface: Just, I'm sure there's a {gap}. Marketing: Okay we'll say two point four two. Right? How does that look? Industrial Designer: I'm impressed. I can't do that without a calculator. {vocalsound} User Interface: No I can't do long {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's been a while. User Interface: very impressive. Project Manager: And what what is the acceptable criteria? Is there like a scale that we have to hit? Marketing: Oh no. They just told me to Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} pick my own criteria and have you guys evaluate it {vocalsound} basically. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Alright then. Marketing: So that's that. Project Manager: Okay. Well, let's see. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we get to do the budget numbers. You didn't know that you were gonna have a budget. But we do. Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah so. You'd been going a long time dividing that. It's two point four two eight five se it just keeps going on. Marketing: Oh my god. User Interface: Two point four two basically. Marketing: Okay. Yeah we'll go with that. Project Manager: So I have here an {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fifty percent, you're kidding. Marketing: Not too shabby. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} P Project Manager: We want a fifty percent profit on this. Oh you can't really see that very well. User Interface: {vocalsound} Charge about three hundred quid for it. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Twelve and a half Euros is what supposed to cost us. Okay, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's too much. Project Manager: Well let's see. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: The f the {disfmarker} Wonder if I can make this {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: What the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Oh it won't let me do that. Okay. Alright so at top, I don't know if you guys can read that or not. I can't'cause I don't have my glasses on, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but so we've got the energy source. There's uh four, five, six categories. Industrial Designer: Battery. Project Manager: We have energy source, electronics, case. Then we have case material supplements, interface type, and then button supplements. Okay so {disfmarker} Uh first of all energy source, we picked battery. Um and how many batteries do we think this will probably take? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Probably some e either two or four. Industrial Designer: Two. Project Manager: Two? {vocalsound} Like it. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: At four it's gonna be too heavy, so that that's not our problem. People can change it every month. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Excellent. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} They won't know until after they bought it. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is consumerism. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Alright so for the electronics our choices are simpl simple chip-on-print, regular chip-on-print, advanced chip-on-print, sample sensor, sample speaker. Industrial Designer: {gap}. User Interface: We're advanced chip are we? Industrial Designer: That's the advanced chip-on-print, yeah. Project Manager:'Kay, {gap} we have one of those.'Kay then the case is a {disfmarker} Probably it's double curved. Industrial Designer: Double curved, yes. Project Manager: Case materials are Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: plastic. Um I guess it's two, since one for the top, one for the bottom. Industrial Designer: N no. Project Manager: Is that right or is it just one? Industrial Designer: No that's just one. Project Manager: Maybe it's one because of the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just one mo single mould, we can do that. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah {gap} yeah. Marketing: Right. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I guess it doesn't matter'cause the price on that one is zero, which is nice. Industrial Designer: Exactly, right. Marketing: Oh. Project Manager: Special colour? Industrial Designer: That's not a special colour. It's a specially ugly colour, but it's not special. Marketing: Bright yellow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Interface type. We have pushbutton, scroll-wheel interface, integrated scroll-wheel pushbutton, and an L_C_D_ display. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: S Industrial Designer: S {vocalsound} User Interface: That's {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: So we actually have the L_C_D_ display Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: and then is it the integrated or is it {disfmarker} User Interface: I'd say the integrated. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes unfortunately. Project Manager:'Kay. Button supplement? Special colour? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um special form? Special material. Industrial Designer: We could of course make the buttons wood. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Say mahogany or so Marketing: {vocalsound} It'd look really lovely. Project Manager: Or titanium. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm or titanium. Project Manager: They cost us all the same. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: {gap} remote control {gap}. Project Manager: Well we only have one button so really we shouldn't be charged, Industrial Designer: Uh just {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} we shouldn't be charged anything for the the button supplements. User Interface: No that's getting a bit tiny. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I'd ignore that. Marketing: Leave it blank. Project Manager: Okay. We're gonna leave that one blank because we run on a L_C_D_ and scroll. So our total is fifteen point five. Which I believe is Industrial Designer: Yeah that's too much. Project Manager: by three Euros over. Industrial Designer: It's hard to believe. So we'll go for the hand dynamo huh? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So the only thing better than um a banana-shaped remote is one that you shake. User Interface: If it w What if we completely took out the the one single button we've got on. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: And just had a scroll wheel interface. And the L_C_D_ display. I suppose the L_C_D_ C_ display's the one that's pushing it up a bit though. Project Manager: Yeah'cause the {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well'cause we have to have both right? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I mean let's let's face it, it also depends on the software on the on the television. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can have the the information that this thing transmits be being displayed on the on the screen. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So s yeah let's take away the {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah you could maybe take out the L_C_D_ dis display even, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: if it if it comes up on the computer itsel on the T_V_ itself. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So we may not need the L_C_D_ display? User Interface: Uh that is possible yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. We may not need it. There you go. Project Manager: Well there we go. Industrial Designer: Perfect. Project Manager: Twelve point five. User Interface: There we go. Marketing: {vocalsound} Perfect. Project Manager: Okay. So we just remove our {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Screen. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: screen here. User Interface: Make it a bigger dial. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Easier to use. Even easier to use then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay, the {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Besides look at what the L_C_D_ does to our lovely remote. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Back to the design room boys. Industrial Designer: So we can just take away a heck of a lot of the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: there you go. {gap} central? Marketing: What's the blue part? User Interface: That was just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh that's just {disfmarker} User Interface: we ran out of yellow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's the batteries. Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: There you go User Interface: There you go. Industrial Designer: . Oops. User Interface: Even simpler. Marketing: {vocalsound} Looks more like a banana. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: There you go. User Interface: For all those fruit lovers out there. Industrial Designer: One more criteria. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so the costs under twelve point five Euro. Was no. We redesigned it. Now it's yes. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Next slide. Project evaluation. Uh project process, satisfaction with, for example, room for creativity, leadership, teamwork, means, new ideas found. Um {disfmarker} So {disfmarker} I guess that {disfmarker} Let's see here. I think that perhaps the project evaluation's just supposed to be completed by me. But I'd like to hear your thoughts. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Fair enough. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Trying to fill in some time there. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh h what did you think of our project process? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Great. {vocalsound} User Interface: I think we did {disfmarker} yeah I think we did quite well. Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Good. Marketing: Good teamwork {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just half a day, you have a remote. There you go. User Interface: Yeah. Right from the start of the day. Project Manager: Yeah I think {disfmarker} User Interface: We sort of knew where we were going straight away I thought. Project Manager: {gap} we st we started off a little little weak. Our leadership was quite weak in the beginning. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: But as the day went along we had more idea of what we were doing. Um room for creativity? There was that. Um I think we tried a lotta different things and um I think it was um interesting as you guys brought up more um information and studies that we were right on with a lot of those things. Um you guys worked together well as a team. And um the means? Which was the whiteboard and the pens. User Interface: Yeah. We've used the whiteboard. Industrial Designer: Super super. Project Manager: I had some problem with the pen I think, but {vocalsound} minus your p Marketing: Minus your PowerPoint fiasco. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well that's not my fault. That's obviously the people I work for uh that work for me, Marketing: No I know. I'm {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah. Incom {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: uh they've just you know {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Have a {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Heads are gonna roll, believe me. Project Manager: we have a list of employees that you would like fired. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yes yes. Project Manager: Okay. N new ideas found? Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Kinda. Project Manager: Yes for the remote. Maybe no not f for User Interface: Technology used. Project Manager: technology. Alright. Closing. Costs are within the budget. Project is evaluated. Um complete the final questionnaire and meeting summary. That's it. User Interface: Excellent. Project Manager: And I still have to do my minutes for the last meeting. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Actually. Um so there will probably be another questionnaire coming up. And then we'll have to check with the main boss whether we can, what goes on after that. Marketing: We might have a while though. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Project Manager: But that's the end of our meeting.

Firstly, Project Manager reviewed the overall process that the team designed the remote control that they had viewed the fashion trends and incorporated the key features. After that, User Interface introduced the prototype of remote control based on the previous discussion of its function. The prototype was yellow like a banana with a simplest quick on-off button and could be used both-handed. Secondly, Marketing designed an evaluation test according to criteria found of the market trend as well as the customers'complaints and the team gave one to seven points to the shape, colour, material, controls and functions of the product. Thirdly, the team found that the current product exceeded the budget, so the team decided to completely discard the single button and LCD. Lastly, the team gave positive feedback on the project and the process.

tr-sq-8

tr-sq-8_0

What did the group discuss about budget balancing? Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

The use of the LCD screen and the advanced chip cost the team half of the expenditure. Due to the budget limit, the team had to abandon some other designs such as the rubber material and the double-curved structure. The USB connection was not feasible for now as well. For the location function, a transmitter, a receiver and speakers could be incorporated on a TV instead.

tr-sq-9

tr-sq-9_0

Summarize the conclusion of the incorporation of articulation when discussing budget balancing. Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

In the budget balancing, User Interface desired an articulation, which would, however, lead the remote control to be double-curved. Initially, Project Manager was not sure about this, for the double-curved design would go over the budget. Industrial Designer pointed out that a single curve would still allow the articulation. The remote control could be made in two parts and joined together with the articulation. Project Manager accepted Industrial Designer's proposal.

tr-sq-10

tr-sq-10_0

Summarize the conclusion of the location function when discussing budget balancing. Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

User Interface told the team that the corporate had decided to incorporate a voice recognition chip into the remote control so that the team had to invent another method for users to locate the remote control once it got lost in a room. The team decided to make the remote control a special colour. Meanwhile, the remote control would be able to camouflage in the living room. Project Manager further proposed that the team could also make the remote control glow in the dark.

tr-sq-11

tr-sq-11_0

What did the group discuss about the product evaluation? Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

In the product evaluation, the team was satisfied with its success in reducing the number of unused buttons. The user interface was considered to be user-friendly enough. However, the team also admitted that there was still room for improvement on the location function, technological innovation, the material, as well as the fashion style of the remote control.

tr-sq-12

tr-sq-12_0

What did Project Manager think of the plastic material when discussing the product evaluation? Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

The team had decided to replace the rubber with plastic due to the budget limit. When evaluating the material of the remote control, Marketing admitted that sponginess was what most users desired, which was the feel given by rubber. Project Manager agreed. However, Project Manager pointed out that a plastic remote control was no worse than other remote controls in the market, so it would not be a step-back at least.

tr-sq-13

tr-sq-13_0

What did User Interface think of the fashion style of the remote control when discussing the product evaluation? Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

Marketing concluded from the market research that users expected the remote control to combine fruit and vegetable elements with its fashion design. User Interface disagreed with Marketing, for it was believed by User Interface that fruit and vegetable style was not the sole criterion for satisfactory fashion design of the remote control. Instead, User Interface implicated that all designs inspired by current fashions were likely to win the users over.

tr-gq-14

tr-gq-14_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: That should hopefully do the trick, um.'Kay. Sorry about the small delay. Falling a little bit behind schedule. And that's uh fifteen twenty five. Okay. So just to try and roughly go over what we agreed in the last one, um we're gonna go for something uh uh how was it? Uh The new black, I believe. Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Um something that looks good'cause that seems to be in preference to actual functionality in the end, though we should never avoid functionality, of course. Uh many of our components are gonna be standard, off the shelf, but it seemed like we were gonna require at least an advanced chip and we were still very much for the idea of using an L_C_D_ display. Um other things were we were hoping to use rubber, most likely gonna be double curved, etcetera. Okay. So um due to your hard work, we might as well let the uh two designers go first, and uh show us the prototype. User Interface: Okay, it's a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Quite how the best way to do this is, I'm not sure, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {gap} I think if we both step up Project Manager: but {disfmarker} User Interface: and uh outline our ideas. Okay. Now do {disfmarker} uh doing the prototype gave us a bit more insight into the ergonomics of the design. Um for one thing, it turned out that the only point at which it needs to be articulated for handedness is um is h i is down here for the uh L_E_D_. As it turned out, the whole thing transfers from the right to left hand fairly well from the point of view of operating the uh function buttons and joystick, though it might be an idea to be able to a adjust the positions for the base of the joystick just a little bit for uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} ju just a thought. You could simply have a slightly ovoid shaped joystick that could then just be turn uh twisted round, so that the uh sticky uh so that the bit that sticks out a bit more is on one side or the other. But as you as you see with the uh {vocalsound} with holding it in the left hand, the L_ uh the L_C_D_ is nowhere useful, so that would need to be articulated uh if we're going to retain {gap} ergonomic design. Um now I I got your note about uh keeping the cost down. Project Manager: I'm afraid yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: We'll go into that a bit more, User Interface: {gap} this design could be done with um with uh plastic casing. Project Manager: but please go on. User Interface: Though I would recommend around the grip part here in the middle, having maybe just a rubber grip over that which would allow for a slightly more sort of bio-morphic form, and a bit more ergonomic as well. As for the um as for the single curve, um well this edge and this edge, like I say it would be nice to have some curvature to it, but it's not absolutely necessary. Really the curve that's most needed is the underside so that the jo so that the joystick rests over the the edge of the hand like this. Um and you have the uh transmitter here and a wee speaker for the uh for the uh for the uh fi uh for the remote control finder. So. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Any further comments? Industrial Designer: Um obviously it's gonna be bulkier than how it looks, because it's gonna be flat on one side, so the L_C_D_ will be s sticking down like this, won't it? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer:'Cause it {disfmarker} you can't get it curved. User Interface: Yeah, I mean the Industrial Designer: Uh because of costs. User Interface: uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's plastic as well, so it won't be as comfortable on the hand. User Interface: Yeah. I mean with the with the rubber design it could i you know it could pretty much mould very much to the to the user's hand. Project Manager: Mm. User Interface: One nice wee feature if we could if we could still do the rubber, I though of was to have {gap} the uh rubber extend beyond the end of the uh {vocalsound} of the rigid substructure. So it has a wee sort of tail that you just drape over your wrist so it stays in position nicely. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Lovely. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah. Great. Um. Marketing: Right. Yeah I've got a {disfmarker} if you load up my evaluation document. Project Manager: Yeah, okay {gap}. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: Excellent work. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Uh evaluation. {vocalsound} Basic point uh have a list of criteria that we need to rate the prototype by. {vocalsound} Um then we will {disfmarker} it's a seven s um seven seven step kinda evaluation process. So um not seven steps, seven scale. So after we've finished doing all the ratings for each criteria, we average that and that will give us some type of uh confidence in our prototype. And uh the criteria {gap} based on Real Reactions'kinda goals and policies, marketing strategies, and also those I put together from the user requirements phase.'Kay. Um if you flip the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} So, those are the criteria. And uh perhaps I could have put'em a bit better, but you notice a few things that we've totally abandoned, which means {vocalsound} that uh the product will score very badly on some of those points. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Put it mildly. So we have um true? One, t Seven, eight, oh. Fourth. Okay, so we have to go through each point. If we imagine it's actually straight, and just give it a a score. So um how well would you say the prototype is uh how well have we realised the dream of being able to stop remotes from from being lost, or to be able to find them once they are lost. I mean, uh is the homing thing still {disfmarker} the locator, is that still {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, that's still part of the design. Marketing: Sure. And Adam, we can keep that in? Project Manager: Yeah, I believe so. So I mean I don't think anybody could actually stop a remote being lost, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager:'cause that would mean doing something about the human element, Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: but I'd like to think that we've done something about finding the damn thing once we have. Marketing: T User Interface: Mm. Mm. And making it a bright colour helps Marketing: Sure. User Interface: with the {disfmarker} personally I would have gone for purple {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Bright colour. So we still have that noise thing, yeah? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Os on a scale of one to seven, how would you guys rate it for finding {gap} finding it once it's lost? User Interface: I'd say number one. Marketing: Number one? Industrial Designer: One. Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Number number one for the first criteria. User Interface: I think w if it was just the sounder then th {gap} I mean something I've found with uh w w with say tr trying to find uh a cordless phone or a m mobile, you can hear it, but you can't quite pin it dow pin down where it is. Marketing: Yeah you can tell what room the mobile is {disfmarker} User Interface: Bu Industrial Designer: What about {disfmarker} what if the the volume on the T_V_'s turned up massively and uh you just wanna turn down the volume {gap} can't find remote. Suppose you have to go to the T_V_ and do it manually. Mm. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Um Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like y you wouldn't hear the speaker {gap}. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just before we go through all of the steps here, um well what we'll do is Marketing: You wanna say something? Project Manager: um if we can look at the criteria you're gonna evaluate, and then we'll come back to the product evaluation if that's alright. Marketing: That's fine. Project Manager: Yeah, is that {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh that's that's fine. Project Manager: Um so is there anything here that you that you wanted to cover as in the criteria that you've covered? And then we'll come back pretty much promptly to this. Marketing: What do you mean cr is there anything I wanna {disfmarker} Project Manager: I is there any of these criteria that need any explaining? Or is there anything that yous thought tha really would stand out compared to the others? Marketing: Um, a few. {vocalsound} Something I neglected from my initial research is that Real Reactions has a a goal strategy that all of the products be inspired by material fashion, and clothing fashion. That is why fruit and veg being popular in the home and in clothing was important and they want all their products to be somehow inspired by current trends in fashion. So they say we put the fashion in electronics, well they really mean it they they're very big on fashion, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so. That's this bit right here. And uh this bit is this one easy to use for visitors or for anybody? I guess it's just the same as saying easy to use interface, so it's kinda condensed into one. And we can come back to it, you said. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So. Project Manager: No and which we will do very very shortly. Um. Okay. Slight problem we had was that we have an amazing four Euros over budget for what we were hoping to do. Um most of it stems from the use of the L_C_D_ which I think in the end accounted for about half of our expenditure because of course we required a chip as well. Um the only way to get this down was either to ditch the a L_C_D_, at which point we've removed a large part of how we were gonna interface, {gap} require more buttons, etcetera. Or what we did was that we um we as in I as I was quickly going over it was altering the actual structure. Um changing it to plastic and a solid unit with a single curve design would allow us to come back into the um proposed costs and we're just scraping it in, we've got point two of a Euro left over there. So we're just managing it really. Even then as well, um there was no criteria technically defined for a joystick so I've used what I think's appropriate. With any luck that won't mean that we've incurred more cost than we can actually afford to. It blows a lot of our really good ideas kind of slightly to one side, for example the possibility of having a U_S_B_ connection is definitely not viable now. Um. Marketing: Different languages? Project Manager: That should still be viable. We've got an advanced chip, we've got the use of the L_C_D_. So being able to communicate in multiple languages is still very much a possibility. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um but what's something we need to decide on is how we're gonna go from here. {vocalsound} We do need to try and come up with an idea which could be continued with other people if need be. Um. We can I can bring the excel up sheet up and uh show you if you wish um. I really think as m much as it pains me is that we might have to go with plastic and some kind of solid design, possibly meaning that the L_C_D_ wouldn't be in this perfect place. It might be s stuck like slightly between what would be good for left handed and what would be good for a right handed person. User Interface: Mm-hmm I suppose o one thing that could be done is h {vocalsound} is have it um circular and have it s {vocalsound} so that the uh the pink {gap} actually goes a bit over the pinkie finger. Mm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: So that uh th Project Manager: It very much is about making concessions, unfortunately. Um. User Interface: Mm. Marketing: Do you have any data on how much um different prints cost? I mean can you get the entire thing printed with a design um? Project Manager: Um b b b da is {disfmarker} you mean on the plastic, or? Marketing: {gap}. Project Manager: Let's have a look. You now have as much information as I do. {vocalsound} Um. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: So as you can see here, for example, the battery really not very little choice in that one. We've gone for one of the cheaper options as well. Unfortunately we require the advanced chip if we're gonna do what we're needing to. I've said single curved. We really do need it to be that way for the ergonomics of it. Um plastic for some reason incurs no cost, which I've had to very much make advantage of, despite the fact that rubber's only got a value of two Euros per unit. Problem comes here as you can see in the interface. Um if I've read this thing correctly, then we can save point five of a Euro here in that it's not per push button. That might make sense, because then a numeric keypad would come in at um what, four point five Euros, which is an awful lot, so that could well be wrong. Even if we save point five there, it would just mean that we're most likely placing it in actually just gaining a colour for the unit, which has had to be put to one side. As you can see, the use of an L_C_ display um advanced chip and what would determine the scroll wheel here as well because it's an integrated scroll scroll wheel push button that wasn't quite what I think they had in mind with a joystick. Marketing: Why would why would that be more expensive than an individual push button and scroll wheel together? That's quite significantly expensive. Project Manager: I {disfmarker} that's something you'll have to take up with the bean counters. Um Marketing: {gap}. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. {gap} yeah. Project Manager: as you can see I mean that's taken up well over half of the price. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So um I'm very much open to suggestions of where we go, but because we need to shed what was four Euros off of the um the price of for what we really desired, this one comes in under price as you can see, but this was the one that sacrificed the material for the case and for the actual case design. Marketing: We don't even have uh speakers here. The {disfmarker} like uh we uh {disfmarker} what about speakers and transmitters and stuff like that? Have we factored that in? Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Uh no, we haven't, not {disfmarker} Marketing: Transmitter, receiver, speakers. Plus the extra device itself that's gonna be on a T_V_. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Is that gonna be a button, or {disfmarker} Project Manager: That'll {gap} it literally would just be a button. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We might have to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's too expensive {gap} isn't it? Project Manager: It looks like almost nothing {disfmarker} Mm. Oh good call, I missed that. Marketing: I I mean it's not on here, but um. Project Manager: {gap} that's a very valid point. Marketing: Did they s do we have to use an advanced chip for the L_C_D_? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Well that's {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: So if we're gonna go with the L_C_ display, then that's {disfmarker} Marketing: What's a hand dyna dynamo? You have to wind it up? Project Manager: I believe so, yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: That would probably not be in keeping with the um the fashion statement and such, Marketing: {vocalsound} Technology. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Fashion. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So basically the only new thing is the L_C_D_ on the remote now. Project Manager: Being manipulated by the joystick, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh, and joystick, yeah. Project Manager: Which I'm defining as scroll wheel. Um. Marketing: And we couldn't replace the joystick, right? Because we would need four extra buttons to replace it, up down left and right, and that would be more expensive than a {disfmarker} but is a scroll wheel not just back and forward? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah it's just because there was no actual definition for what a joystick might be, that that's what I've labelled it for the purposes of this evaluation. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} The L_C_D_ basically is the big selling point of Project Manager: If we remove the L_C_ display, we could save ourselves Industrial Designer: the remote. Project Manager: a fair amount. Which you could {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But that's what makes it uh original though, User Interface: Mm. I think {gap} if we remove the the L_C_ display then there was absolutely no point to any of these meetings Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: isn't it? User Interface: and we just {gap} we could just put our branding on any other remote control. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Um. Uh k Project Manager: It's a shame. We should possibly have {disfmarker} If we could've increased the price we could've manufactured that and we could've got something far closer to what we were hoping to. Marketing: Does this does this bear in mind that {disfmarker} I mean it's a bit ridiculous that they're gonna charge us what is it, like this much money for three million if we're gonna buy three million components, Project Manager: Again, you'll have to argue with the accountants on that one. Marketing: you know. Project Manager: Um but for the purposes of this meeting, I'm {disfmarker} we're gonna have to stick with these figures. Marketing: Mm.'Kay. Project Manager: So, I would say that it would seem like the general opinion is we're gonna keep the L_C_ display'cause it's about what really separates us, {vocalsound} despite the cost it's gonna incur. Um Marketing: I think so. Project Manager: are people maybe not happy with, but are willing to go ahead with this in going for a plastic solid case, to keep the L_C_D_? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Um yeah {gap} I mean one thing, I mean ho uh how much extra would it be to to keep I mean {vocalsound} keep the um the articulation? Project Manager: It's hard to tell. Um I would say that you're at least gonna take double curved, User Interface: This is what I'm wondering. Project Manager: and even then I'm not quite sure if that's incorporating the idea of articulation. User Interface: Oh Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: no, I think I I it d that it needn't require it to be double curved. Industrial Designer: It can be s yeah, it can still be single curved, User Interface: It's uh it's just {vocalsound} it's just {vocalsound} it's just that the case would come in t {vocalsound} would be made in two parts and then joined together with an articulation. Industrial Designer: but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Single curved with articulation? Industrial Designer: You just {gap}. Marketing: Could we could we not get rid of the curvy the curvous the curvaceousness and focus on the menu being the best interface?'Cause like we {disfmarker} do we have re restrictions on software? Industrial Designer: That's what we need for the joystick I think though. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, I mean Marketing: Oh but there has to be {disfmarker} User Interface: and {vocalsound} I mean the uh I mean if you look uh if you look closer at the uh at the prototype here, the lines here along the grip are actually quite straight. Um I mean {gap} yeah, Project Manager: {vocalsound} But the curves all o over {gap} hand, User Interface: on the {gap} on the L_C_D_ I mean although we've done it with a curve it Project Manager: is it? User Interface: could just as easily be done um without curves. The curve that's really needed is up here, Marketing: {gap} joystick. User Interface: to put uh to keep the joystick in a good ergonomic position for it to have it rest on the top of the hand. Marketing: Okay. Sure. Okay, my bad. Project Manager: We wouldn't actually save a lot by reducing it anyway, so I mean for the purposes of this meeting maybe we can state that single curve still allows articulation. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um unless we hear otherwise we could go ahead with that proposal. Marketing: So I think the product is not gonna perform so well for my criteria. Project Manager: Which is what we can get onto now. As long as {disfmarker} so are we gonna say {disfmarker} {gap} w we have to keep an eye on the time as well, but we're gonna say um single curved design {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, wait a minute. Sample speaker? What is a sample speaker? Is that somewhat similar to what we want? Project Manager: It could well be, User Interface: Mm no Project Manager: but at a cost of {disfmarker} User Interface: that's that voice response thing that we got the email about. Industrial Designer: Costs four. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: But I thought it was just completely pointless. Marketing: You got a email about voice response? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I did not, User Interface: Alright. Marketing: so. User Interface: B i basically it was {gap} saying that our labs had come up with a chip that you could, you know, say hello to, and it would say hello back in a friendly female voice {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, yeah we'll definitely won't go with that one. Marketing: We won't go with that one, did you say? Project Manager: Yeah, that's voice recognition, so. Marketing: I mean I {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} Okay, okay. Project Manager: Um. So, okay yeah, battery definitely, {disfmarker} Marketing: So it looks like we're gonna get rid of the whole loca {vocalsound} locator thing. Project Manager: It looks like it unless we can manage to put it in under point two Euros, um. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Maybe even slight well oh yeah, pretty much point two Euros, I'd say. So we'll leave that one for now. {gap} we'll just have {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Are we going for a special colour at all? Project Manager: It's uh a case of um I'm uh slightly unsure. One {disfmarker} point five of a Euro for one push button doesn't sound quite right. So maybe it's a case of a push button is maybe one or more. Um. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Well Project Manager: At which point if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I was {gap} for a case. Or had you already incorporated that? Marketing: Oh, special colour for the case. Project Manager: Well you got point five there. It's literally a case of whether or not this is correct. I'm not quite sure if they're {disfmarker} I don't think they mean point five Euros per button. User Interface: Okay, well Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: l let's say that and then we can have our special coloured case Project Manager: So User Interface: and then we at least have {disfmarker} make it a little harder to lose. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: Because most m most remotes are a fairly dingy colour that gets camouflaged under any pile of crap in a living room. Marketing: W what's the default colour? White or black? Project Manager: Black's probably the normal colour you'd say, User Interface: Or grey. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: I quite like that colour that you're fetching there, User Interface: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's uh definitely for make it glow in the dark even better. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So will we go with that then? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: It's not and we can see {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: we'll come back to uh your evaluation Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: which you're probably now going to pan us but there we go. Marketing: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So uh {vocalsound} Project Manager: Just to give you an idea, um you want to go maybe a bit quickly as well, I'm not sure how much time. We've not hit the five minute mark warning yet, Marketing: Right okay. Okay. Project Manager: but. Industrial Designer: Think it's ten minutes left. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Ten. Marketing:'Kay. Ability to stop remotes from being lost or to find them once they are lost. Um. Okay. Industrial Designer: Special colour. Marketing: Special colour. Project Manager: Mm mm four? Marketing: Uh uh four. Project Manager: Three? Mm. User Interface: Three. I think we can do three. Marketing: Three if we're being generous, I feel. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Th the special colour doesn't {disfmarker} would I think make a difference. Marketing: Think we're being generous here with three. Industrial Designer: Three. User Interface: It makes it stand out from {disfmarker} you know it's lost in a big pile of crap, it stands out from the rest of the crap. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Yeah. {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Reduce the number of unused buttons. We're down to t two buttons, is it? User Interface: Two buttons and a joystick. Project Manager: Two buttons. Marketing: Okay, so that's a one. You know, User Interface: Totally. Marketing: where that's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. I'd say we're doing well there. Marketing: Okay, that was good. Easy to use interface, buttons menu, menus {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Marketing: that's yeah that's good. {vocalsound}'Kay that's {disfmarker} we're not doing so badly. Um {vocalsound} easy to use {disfmarker} oh okay, let's forget that one. Fancy looking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} As he models the {disfmarker} User Interface: It doesn't get much fancier. Marketing: Sure. And we could do whatever we like with the L_ L_C_D_. Yeah let's just assume it's a good L_C_D_ display. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Maybe I was panicking for no reason. Industrial Designer: Are we going one on {gap}? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, Industrial Designer: I'd say we go two,'cause like f the fanciest would be the double curved. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Wouldn't it? Marketing: w maybe you'd be a bit too {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: yeah. There we go. Yeah, Industrial Designer: With the articulators. With bells on it. Marketing: that's m that's that's better too. More accurate numbers. Technologically innovative. Well, we're getting rid of the locator thing Project Manager: Which is a shame. Marketing: which which User Interface: Mm. I'd give it a three for this {disfmarker} for that. Marketing: yeah {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No need for teletext. Marketing: {gap}. User Interface: Yeah. I mean the menus thing is something you don't normally see on um on a remote, Marketing:'Kay. User Interface: but {vocalsound} you see it in a lot of other places. Marketing: Yeah, mobile phones. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: And y what you're doing is moving the menu from the television to the remote control, so it's {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: You say three? I might go as far as two on that. Three. User Interface: I'd give it a three. Project Manager: I'd be tempted with three, yeah. Marketing: Three. Okay. Project Manager: We'll get panned on the next one, anyway. Marketing: Okay. Materials that people find pleasing. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, w Marketing: Sponginess is what they really would have wanted, apparently. Project Manager: It is, yeah. Don't blame them. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um because of the way that we've minimalised the number of buttons and such. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Plastic, it sucks. But it's no worse than any of the other pl remote controls we have. Marketing: That's true. It's not a step backwards. Industrial Designer: {gap} five? User Interface: Mm-hmm. I'd s I I'd give it a six, to be honest. Industrial Designer: Six? Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, okay let's give it a six. Industrial Designer: Six, {gap}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay, that's totally thrown everything off balance. Inspired by the latest interior and clothing fashion. W we could. What colour were we gonna make it? Industrial Designer: Put a leopard print on it. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I I I would sa I would say give a s give a selection of colours. Marketing: {vocalsound} I know, User Interface: Um we went with yellow we went with yellow for the prototype Marketing: but {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause we had yellow. If I were buying one, I'd go for purple. Leopard print would be cool. Marketing: But um by this I think it's more a case of fruit and veg, {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we gotta {gap}. I'd say the colour of the border there world {disfmarker} you'd find that, {gap} that's that'd stand out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Like yellow, yeah. It would also help keep the the product placement s Industrial Designer: Logo, brand. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Is it inspired by {gap} clothing fashion? Marketing: But {disfmarker} Th th they're referring to the fruit and veg thing. Industrial Designer: Mm'kay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yes. Marketing: Is this like a banana type colour? Could we stretch {disfmarker} no still, it's not shaped like a banana is {disfmarker} User Interface: That's kinda {disfmarker} {gap} i Project Manager: It's kind o it User Interface: it won't be when it's been Project Manager: probably {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh is that'cause it's flat? User Interface: budgeted. Marketing: What is {disfmarker} what fruit or veg is flat? User Interface: I I think s I I think this isn't {disfmarker} not particularly fruit and veggie. Um. Marketing: Yeah. Or we might have to suffer badly for this one as well. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yellow courgette. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I mean it's probably more fruit and veg than most other things out there bar fruit and veg, so, {vocalsound} what, four? Marketing: Four? Oh that's it's very ambitious, Project Manager: Is that being too generous? User Interface: Mm. I'd {vocalsound} I'd I don't think fruit and veg is the sole criterion. {vocalsound} Is the sole criterion for being um fashion {gap} fashionable or inspired by current fashions. Marketing: yeah, um. Project Manager: Oh dear, {gap}. Marketing: Sure. Inspired by {gap}. User Interface: Um I'd g I'd rate I'd rate this fairly highly from that point of view actually. Industrial Designer: Well this this what we're gonna t this is their motto, like. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we're we're not doing well on it. Marketing: This is their strategy. I m imagine we actually had some money invested in this and the amount that we invest is gonna be proportional to the marks. Might {disfmarker} we might wanna be a bit more skepible sceptical about this one. Project Manager: What would you think yourself? Marketing: I would say {disfmarker} I mean it's it's not at all, right? {vocalsound} In any way or shape or form. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well, it's kind of curved Marketing: We didn't m Project Manager: and we can make it yellow, and that's pretty much banana like. Marketing: Okay, the the yellow banana like thing is I think is okay. Project Manager: Si it's got a curve to it. Marketing: Right five. Is that {vocalsound} sound reasonable? Project Manager: Am I {disfmarker} do you think I'm stretching the uh the use of the banana? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'll go with five. Marketing: Five. {vocalsound} Yeah.'Kay, so we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven. So five, seven, ten, sixteen, twenty one. Which gives us an average of three. It's {disfmarker} well this would be in the middle. So we it's it's not bad. It's in the good section. Project Manager: It's not bad and considering the {vocalsound} {disfmarker} don't pick the pen. Um. Marketing: {vocalsound} Oops. Sorry. {vocalsound} I'm I'm sorry. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Y oh and you've knocked batteries out. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um right okay it's {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'S bad design, that thing. {vocalsound} Project Manager: considering the price we had to get this in, to have a positive {disfmarker} you know, even based on the four of us being heavily biased, um Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} it was gonna be quite hard to get anything standing out I'd say possibly, based on um the the cost features. User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Mm, yeah. Marketing: Even if we were to increase this entire thing by by seven, we were to go down a grade to to four, we would have to do {disfmarker} I mean we didn't we weren't that kinda optimistic too optim overly optimistic. You know like we didn't we didn't add we didn't subtract a whole seven points from these things, so I think we're definitely on the good bit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Even if we gave this one seven and this one seven, that's still only three extra points over seven. You know, it's {disfmarker} yeah, User Interface: Mm. Personally, I think given that the product um only replaces a single remote control Marketing: we did it w it was okay. It was good. User Interface: that you've already got, are people really gonna shell out twenty five Euros for something that's only marginally good? Industrial Designer: Well, it depends who your {disfmarker} who's {disfmarker} what the target people are, like you'd say maybe the fashion conscious Project Manager: Maybe it's been targeted {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: women would be going, oh look at that,'s cool, it looks like a {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: it's yellow, looks like a banana, it's cool it's gotta {disfmarker} look good in the sitting room. Project Manager: Hide it in the fruit basket. Industrial Designer: Rather than the L_C_D_ whereas uh more technical like like more uh people in with the latest technology {gap} it's good, it's got an L_C_D_ screen's only got two buttons and a joystick. So, which which kind of people would be more likely to buy it? Project Manager: Probably the people technologically. They're usually the ones that buy pointless stuff. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I think so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I mean my mum still has not learnt how to use text messaging on her phone, and she's had it for a long time, you know. She uses it to make phone calls and that's it. Industrial Designer: {gap}. Marketing: Yeah. So I think if sh if my mum saw a remote control like this with only two buttons and a joystick, I mean that'll probably be the first one she decides not to buy, you know. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: She'd be like is this a remote control, I don't {disfmarker} how do you use it, and stuff like that. So even if it is really user friendly to us, but we're used to using menus all the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. I s {vocalsound} I suppose one thing is that b because it's technically innovative, um for someone who's sort of technophobic, the fact that it simply looks unfamiliar would be daunting. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Um. Marketing: I think it's totally uh radical to have a remote control with no no numbered buttons, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: But like radical good, maybe. Project Manager: Okay. Um don't know how lo much longer we've got. At least five minutes I think. Um quickly we'll pop onto project evaluation. Um. So, we've got these uh four criteria here for uh satisfaction. Does anybody want to um um do you have any opinions on any of them? For example um {disfmarker} we'll work backwards I suppose. The ability to work on this project using the technology we've been presented with. Um {gap} people made good use of the uh pen and paper? User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: I would say {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: got notes and doodles. Marketing: {vocalsound} Wrote nearly a page, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: but not {gap}. Project Manager: I'm not quite sure what the advantage for us using a digital pen might be. User Interface: Well I think this is a {disfmarker} I think the digital pen's mostly for the benefit of the uh Marketing: I think tracking. User Interface: of the researchers studying this. It's all p goes into their corpus. Project Manager: It must {disfmarker} User Interface: Though it would have been nice to be able to transfer the um transfer our n our paper notes onto the uh computer ourselves. Marketing: Yeah, that woulda been pretty good. Project Manager: It does seem like the paper's still a heavy consideration for taking notes. So maybe this is literally just a way around it. Um I dunno. How are people satisfied with the teamwork we've managed to display today? User Interface: {gap}. Marketing: I'd {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Good. Marketing: yeah I liked it, yeah. Project Manager: Leadership. As much as can be leadered in this uh thing. Industrial Designer: Very good. Marketing: I li yeah, top marks. Project Manager: Um last one we've got is room for creativity. Marketing: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Unti uh uh until uh until accounts came along, Project Manager: Now, I think we got {disfmarker} User Interface: {gap} squish. Industrial Designer: We're burs bursting with creativity. Marketing: yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah Marketing: We we're not lacking in ideas, you know it's {disfmarker} that was not the problem. Project Manager: I think of {disfmarker} in the end, ideas that can be used {gap} sadly {gap}. Not so much that we weren't full of ideas, but of ones that are gonna allow us to actually build the thing. It's a bit of a pity. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um I would have to agree on that. I think we needed a larger budget. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you're going to aim your a um product maybe at the technological kind of sector, then you can afford to maybe jack the price up slightly from what it is. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Because they will pay outrageous cash to {gap} User Interface: Mm. I mean I th {vocalsound} I mean I think to r retaining the s the more sort of bio-morphic form in the articulation would gain more in s uh would gain more profit in sales than it would lose in uh Project Manager: first on the market. User Interface: in added expense. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: And the price was like {disfmarker} it was twice the w assembly cost. And would it have to be twice that? It could be like coulda had the assembly {gap} like maybe fifteen Euro. Project Manager: It could even {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We'll still settle for twenty five {vocalsound}. Project Manager: That's true, yeah. Industrial Designer: Maybe. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um I suppose these are all that will have to be taken up with a at a different group at I guess. As to a {gap} the costs involved. But I mean we've got a a prototype. User Interface: Such as it is. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So I dunno, I I think it's gone okay today, considering the information that we've had at our disposal, and um such. Marketing: Maybe the counts wou woulda been better if we had a list or more {disfmarker} Yeah, to begin with. Industrial Designer: In the beginning, yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Probably would have {disfmarker} mean we could have come up with a lot more solid design in the end, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I would have to agree. It is very much a pity to um get so far into the stage and then find out that maybe some of your ideas are just a bit too expensive. Always hard to tell until you know the costs. Um. Okay. Are the costs within budget? Well, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: they are now that we have our slightly less than capable product. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: We've evaluated it, and we can say that we came out with a value of three. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Actually I want th one thing I would say {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: I mean something that could perhaps be part of the product mm the um m product testing market research process would be to uh produce mock-ups of both versions and see just how much of a difference the over {gap} going over-budget um m would make to sales. Project Manager: It's {disfmarker} yeah? Marketing: And like response from consumers {gap}. User Interface: And we could even you know, market two versions. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wee cheapie version with the nice bio-morphic rubber. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the final one where you get to call it Hal. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: But we'll go into that later. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure. Project Manager: Right um Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: is there anything else that anybody would like to to add, um {gap} anything they think that's not been covered, before I quickly write up a final report. Um I dunno, I mean we've got a product. We maybe aren't as happy with it as we'd like to be, but we've got something we think we can maybe stick onto the the market and sell. And of course something we have been avoiding talking about'cause of we've no information is selling them directly to the manufacturers. There is a huge market. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I mean we've briefly touched on it but we've no more knowledge then there's little we can say on that. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah. So um unless anybody's got anything they'd like to add, we can maybe round this up slightly earlier than we'd need to and then we can finish up the writing and such. User Interface: And I can get my bus. Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Marketing: Yeah. Okay, let's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh thank you for your participation. Marketing: Thank you. User Interface: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} I was actually kind of upset you know at the budget, and that we had to cut a lot of stuff. It's like man, we we can't have the locator thing. And s yeah that's just bad. Do you think maybe {gap} the prices were were made? Project Manager: That {gap} a question we can ask {gap}. {vocalsound}

Industrial Designer and User Interface presented a prototype of the new remote control according to the team's previous meetings. However, due to the budget limit, the team had to give up the spongy rubber material and the double-curved design. Instead, the remote control would be made of plastic and have only one curve. There would not be any location function, either. The team decided to make the remote control conspicuous by designing a bright yellow banana shape in case it got lost easily in a room. In the product evaluation, the team was satisfied with its success in reducing the number of unused buttons. The user interface was considered to be user-friendly enough. However, the team also admitted that there was still room for improvement on the location function, technological innovation, the material, as well as the fashion style of the remote control. At the end of the meeting, all team members expressed themselves about the teamwork sincerely.

tr-sq-15

tr-sq-15_0

What did the meeting discuss about the advantage of the Act? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Although highly challenged by the participants, Kirsty Williams AM argued that the Act had fulfilled the Government's objectives in regulating institutions, safeguarding contribution, managing fair access and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. These strategic aims were still really important but in the new situation, it was required to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England. In this case, to continue fulfilling its national outcomes, the Act should evolve by implementing new student support measures.

tr-sq-16

tr-sq-16_0

What did the meeting discuss about the weakness of the Act? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

The Act was considered that the legislation itself was not strong enough by Sian Gwenllian AM and Kirsty Williams AM agreed that remit letters were a really important way in which national priorities could be preserved. Moreover, it was stressed that it was important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system. In this case, they should be designated on a case-by-case basis and always be able to protect the interests of the students. Besides, Kirsty Williams AM pointed out that the government had not identified an urgent reason to designate different types of courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit, but in fact, the regulation for each type of them did differ from each other.

tr-sq-17

tr-sq-17_0

What had the Act and the Bill already achieved? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

To answer this question, Kirsty Williams AM first introduced the achievements that the new system of student finance did again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have in the different situations, as a direct result of the changing scenario. Moreover, it was a great success to see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement.

tr-sq-18

tr-sq-18_0

How could the Act and the Bill be improved? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Currently, the government planned to use the remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, it had been a success to use the remit letter and some funding to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. To conclude, Kirsty Williams AM suggested that the new PCET reforms were aimed to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encouraged collaboration and co-operation across the sector.

tr-sq-19

tr-sq-19_0

What was the current situation about HEFCW's powers of intervention? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Dawn Bowden AM challenged that informal measures or actions had been taken in their role as regulator, and Kirsty Williams AM explained that the commission was expected to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which was non-punitive but actually allowed people to participate in it. Meanwhile, Huw Morris suggested that specific mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, etc had been used to hopefully achieve some alignment in the tertiary sector. Also, as a loan-based system of student finance, a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW when things went wrong.

tr-sq-20

tr-sq-20_0

What did the meeting talk about to control HEFCW's powers of intervention? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Huw Morris started by introducing the focus on learning from other nations to track the information flows and help the universities in return. Meanwhile, Kirsty Williams AM suggested a balance to be achieved by each part of the participants. However, Dawn Bowden AM questioned about HEFCW's use of informal measures which might not be as prevalent as they currently are. Kirsty Williams AM answered that it should be remembered that HEFCW would surely be replaced, and a more flexible way would be adopted to control the financial codes of universities to assure the quality of the provision.

tr-sq-21

tr-sq-21_0

What did Hefin David AM concern about the fee and access plans? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

To answer Hefin David AM's question, Kirsty Williams AM first stressed that the success of the fee and access plan relied on the understanding of whether an annual basis was an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether a long period was suitable for the Act. Sometimes it was hard to make a final judgment since the futures of the students were unpredictable but the fee and access plans could always be one of the drivers for some of the improvements. In the meantime, constant efforts had been put into communications with a range of stakeholders to continue developing legislative proposals to assure the fee.

tr-sq-22

tr-sq-22_0

How did Kirsty Williams AM plan to manage risks? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Hefin David AM questioned about the right balance between institutions with the strongest track records that were more highly regulated and those riskier private alternative providers. Kirsty Williams AM argued that more attention should be paid to focus on the inherent quality of those charitable status which was regarded as a key reference point in the operation. Although there were some concerns of some private providers, particularly in England, they should not be treated the same. In this case, the government would regulate them on a course-by-course basis. Moreover, quality provision should be included and alternative providers would be given more attention.

tr-sq-23

tr-sq-23_0

What did Kirsty Williams AM react in response to concerns of the governance of universities? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Kirsty Williams AM first admitted that it was true that the Bill did not directly address issues around governance in the sector. However, establishing a more direct relationship with chairs of universities, especially one-to-one relationships with them, had been attached much importance and it was crucial to help the government understand each aspect of issues in universities. Moreover, ways to make sure that the governing bodies were diverse and it was able to include both student voice as well as the staff voice in governance going forward would be discussed in the future. Kirsty Williams AM stressed that there were plans to engage with each of the governing bodies since the situation was getting far more complex.

tr-sq-24

tr-sq-24_0

How did Sian Gwenllian AM ask about the quality assurance? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Sian Gwenllian AM argued that there was evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provisions in two further education colleges. This process was regarded as an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Sian Gwenllian AM wanted Kirsty Williams AM to explain the situation in that instance and further methods to assure governing qualities.

tr-sq-25

tr-sq-25_0

How did Kirsty Williams AM answer Sian Gwenllian AM's question about quality assurance? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Kirsty Williams AM first explained that it was a bit difficult to put herself in the position of the former Minister but it was clear that it should not be intended. However, she explained that the Act was built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompassesed all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. Huw Morris also helped to explain that a lot of joint operation was required during the process and the new Bill would try to make that clearer.

tr-sq-26

tr-sq-26_0

What did Kirsty Williams AM say about her plan for quality assurance? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

Kirsty Williams AM shared that the government had listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. And she stressed that the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, effective and comprehensive. Besides, the quality framework should cover higher education to make it compatible with ENQA, which was considered as highly important going forward, since it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards to avoid specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Although it might cause a stir, a change must be made in the new situation. Huw Morris also suggested that greater synergy would be encouraged in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement was undertaken in different areas of activity.

tr-gq-27

tr-gq-27_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Suzy Davies and there is no substitute. Janet Finch-Saunders is joining us from the Assembly offices in Colwyn Bay via video conference. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. Item 2, then, this morning is a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. I'm very pleased to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Huw Morris, who is director of the skills, higher education and lifelong learning group in Welsh Government. Thank you, both, for attending, and thank you for the paper that you provided in advance. I will just start the questioning by asking whether you are planning to repeal the 2015 higher education Act, or will it be amended by the post-compulsory education and training Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I'm very pleased to be with the committee again this morning, although it's in slightly unusual circumstances. As a piece of post-legislative scrutiny, this was a Bill that was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, but I think it is really valuable work in the context of the question you just set out: what can we learn from the implementation of this piece of legislation as we move forward with our reform journey and with this Government and my proposals to introduce a new commission for tertiary education? There is much, at the moment, that lies within the 2015 Act that we will look to bring forward into the new legislation, but there are certainly experiences--and I'm sure we'll come on to some of the evidence that has been received about what's worked, what perhaps hasn't worked--that we all want to reflect on and be mindful of as we take forward the new Bill, including the report of this committee as part of it. So, it is our intention that this Bill will be superceded by the new PCETR Bill. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a series of questions now from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Do you believe that the Act has fulfilled all the Government's objectives? Where are the weaknesses? Kirsty Williams AM: Diolch yn fawr, Sian. As I've said, it's a bit difficult to place myself in the mind of the previous Minister when this legislation was first envisaged and then taken through. You'll be aware that there were four main reasons for the introduction of the Bill: around regulation of institutions in Wales; safeguarding the contribution made to public good arising from Welsh Government's financial support for the sector; maintaining a focus on fair access; and preserving and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. I think the evidence that has been received by the committee to date shows that there are different views about the effectiveness of whether all four strategic aims have been achieved. I think those strategic aims are still really, really important and certainly will underpin our thought process going forward, but we have to recognise the higher education and research Bill across the border in England, the implementation of new student support measures in Wales, as well as the report that was done by Ellen Hazelkorn, I think, means it is appropriate that we move forward with different proposals, not just regulation of the HE sector but the post-compulsory sector as a whole. We will look to see what we can do to strengthen or whether there is more that we need to do to achieve those four objectives, because I think those four objectives are still very, very relevant. But we have to have legislation now that is fit for the circumstances we currently find ourselves in and, hopefully, futureproofs us for how we want to see the sector develop in the future. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do you feel perhaps that the legislation itself hasn't been strong enough, and that you then have had to drive some of these objectives through the annual remit letter, rather than through legislation, and that's why the strengthening is required? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, I see the remit letter as a really, really important way in which national priorities and the priorities of an elected Government can be clearly stated, communicated to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and then HEFCW use their powers to ensure that that happens. So, certainly, I see the remit letter as being a very important mechanism for ensuring, as I said, that those national priorities are clearly articulated, and then change happens. Sian Gwenllian AM: Has the current legislation been framed around institutional autonomy so that it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any national outcomes, and is that going to be an element of the new Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly, the 2015 Act contains numerous provisions that protect universities'privileges and autonomy. And that's really important, and those are principles that I am committed to in any legislation that I bring forward. We'll certainly be looking to see how we can carry those protections into the forthcoming Bill, but, at the same time, we do have to ensure appropriate regulation and accountability of institutions for their public funding and the privileges that they enjoy. And I think there are a number of ways in which that can happen. We have a very positive working relationship with the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, and I am very fortunate to have a very positive working relationship with the sector. The remit letters are a really important way in which we can lay out those national priorities. I don't think there's anything in the legislation per se that prevents those national priorities being articulated and being acted upon. Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that's what HEFCW has said in their evidence. They've said that the Bill has been framed in a way where it's not possible for institutions to fulfil any requirements. You're talking about the remit letter; maybe you need to have that discussion there, but, in terms of the Bill itself, you can't make them fulfil any national outcomes. Shouldn't there be a discussion looking to move in a direction where there are national outcomes being set through legislation, because there is public money going into that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I don't know whether we need national outcomes through legislation, because those national priorities, potentially, will change over time. What is really important, and what we will be seeking to do in the new legislation, is look to move to a system of outcome agreements. So, there is a very clear expectation that the commission will have, in regulating the sector, and co-ordinating and funding the sector, to create a system of outcome agreements, where those outputs will reflect national priorities, and that's one of the things that we've consulted on, and will look to take forward in the new legislation. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. That's clear enough. What about private providers? The Act, or the Act as it stands, makes it a requirement for a regulated institution to be a charity, and that means it's not possible to regulate alternative private providers under the Act, even though they can provide higher education in Wales. What is your view on this, and will the new legislation continue with the requirement of being a charity? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. So, I think, first of all, it's important to make the distinction between the scale of private providers, and what could be termed as'unregulated providers'in the Welsh system, as opposed to the English system. And I think that's a really important distinction to make. So, currently, under the current legislation, unregulated providers can only access Welsh Government student support if they're designated on a case-by-case basis. So, we do have a circumstance where--and a process in place, to manage this. So, we have a specific designation policy, which is operated on our behalf by HEFCW. Only six organisations were designated on a case-by-case basis in the 2018-19 academic year, so the scale here is small. Three of those were further education colleges. So, when we talk about a private provider, perhaps people would have a view of a private university, but, actually, three of those were FE colleges, which we would all be familiar with. And the three private providers were the Centre for Alternative Technology, the training arm of the Church in Wales and the Newport and District Group Training Association. All three of those are actual charities. So, in order for their courses to be specifically designated, the three crucial questions that those providers have to answer are: quality--is what they're providing to students of a good quality; the financial viability of the institution, again, to try to protect the interests of the students who may find themselves embarking on a course in an institution that isn't viable; as well as their contribution to private--sorry, not to private good--public good. And we are considering how that part of the sector will be regulated in the forthcoming legislation. But, Huw, I don't know if there's anything else to add? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that there are a very small number of private providers, as the Minister has outlined, and, in comparison with England, where I think the last figures said that there were between 300 and 400 private providers in England, you get a sense of the differences that exist there. And, if you look at what happened over recent years, it has been those small private providers across the UK who have been most financially challenged and a number of them have stopped their operations, with consequences for the students. So, we've been keen to put students at the front of things to make sure that the institutions that they're enrolling with are strong and have good quality. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. So, what you're saying is that you will continue with a charitable status, or not-- Kirsty Williams AM: At this stage-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --or are you still thinking about it? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, at this stage, I think the charitable status will continue to be an important part of what we will take forward. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just turning finally to part-time fees and postgraduate fees, do you have an intention to regulate this part in the new legislation? Kirsty Williams AM: I have to say that, at present, we've not identified an urgent reason to designate these courses as qualifying courses for the purposes of a fee limit. And there are a number of reasons for that. Actually, the current Act--the 2015 Act--does not permit the fee regulation of postgraduate courses, other than PGCE courses for IT purposes. In the case of part-time courses, I'm currently content that fee levels are not exceeding the amount of student support made available by the Welsh Government. So, I think we are, at this moment, relaxed about that, and there are some difficulties around deciding and introducing fee limits on postgraduate courses. I think what's really important to me is the success at the moment of attracting people to postgraduate and part-time study in Wales, as a result of our reforms to student finance. But, clearly, we'll need to keep that under review. But, at this current moment, the Act precludes fee regulation in some areas and there's not a pressing policy need that we've identified to date. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on now to some questions about the level of ambition in the higher education Act and any lessons for the PCET Bill, from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. To what extent has the 2012 university funding system limited Welsh Government's policy leverage over the sector, and how has the HE Act addressed this beyond the levers offered by fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, the Act was introduced as a direct result of the changing scenario around finance and the different ways in which, because of the reduction in HEFCW's budget, the level of influence that HEFCW would be able to exert over institutions through the imposition of terms and conditions of funding--. So, the Act was introduced in part to address that shift in influence and the Act also has provided HEFCW with a range of new powers of intervention and sanctions in the case of non-compliance by institutions. Personally, I wholeheartedly believe that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of what I'd describe as a civic mission. I'm determined that any legislation that I bring forward and any commission that I establish will be empowered to enable that to happen through its regulatory and funding powers. Of course, the funding situation has shifted again now because of the introduction of what is commonly known as the Diamond reforms, but our new system of student finance does again shift the parameters of influence that HEFCW or any new tertiary commission could have. But, as I said earlier, it's not to say that institutions have had a free reign. We have been able to use the remit letter and our relationship with HEFCW to progress agendas that we would want to see. So, for instance, you'll be aware, in my remit letter, I am concerned about issues around how people working in the sector are paid. We've been able to successfully see all institutions sign up to becoming living wage employers, all institutions sign up to the Welsh Government's code of ethical procurement. So, it's not to say that the Act has meant that we've had no influence, but there are opportunities now, because of the change in financial circumstances once again, to look at that in any forthcoming legislation. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Minister. Do you share HEFCW's views on the benefits of having national targets to get institutions to address national priorities? Is this something you wish you could do? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, it's not something I wish I could do; I think that we're doing it. Self-praise is no recommendation, but, because of the working relationship that we have, I think we're seeing some success in using the remit letter to influence national outcomes. So, I've just talked about living wage; we're also using our remit letter to drive transparency over senior leaders'pay, the gender pay gap within institutions. For instance, as part of this Government's commitment to improving mental health, we've been able to use the remit letter and some funding to be able to drive change and some improvements in mental health in the higher education sector. These are national priorities and we're acting upon them and we're using the multiple levers we have at the moment to engage in universities. And, I have to say, universities have risen to that challenge, and I'm very grateful to them for doing that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you. Are there plans to give the proposed new PCET funding body more effective policy levers to align the sector to the social, economic and civic needs of Wales? And, if so, how will this be done? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said in answer earlier, I'm determined that we ensure a sense of civic mission for the entirety of the sector, including our institutes of higher education. You'll be aware, Janet, that, in the consultation exercises that have been undertaken by the Government so far on PCET reform, we will be introducing more formal outcome agreements, whereby institutions might be given by the commission very clear expectations of how they're expected to contribute to national priorities. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thanks. We've heard that the HE Act, by focusing on individual institutions, did not encourage collaboration, even for widening access activity. Was this a missed opportunity and how will this be taken forward in the PCET Bill? Kirsty Williams AM: I think we can strengthen our sector by closer collaboration. I think what sets us apart in Wales is that this Government is determined to create a legislative regime and a regulation regime that encourages collaboration and co-operation, which is in stark contrast to the marketisation and the competition that we see being regulated for and legislated for across the border in England. That's one of the reasons why we are going to introduce the new PCET reforms--to create collaboration, not just between different higher education institutes but actually across the sector. So, this is a prime opportunity where we can create a framework that demands and encourages collaboration, not just, as I said, in between individual institutions but across the entirety of the sector. We're doing that because that means we can avoid duplication, we can fill gaps that there currently are and we can create a system that allows for a seamless passage for students to move between the different parts of post-compulsory education that are currently available, where, sometimes, those students find barriers. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, Janet? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you--that's great, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now around HEFCW's powers of intervention from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. We received substantial evidence from HEFCW suggesting that powers were inflexible and hard to use--I think HEFCW called them'threatening'--saying that they make sanctions difficult to use and so on. Are you satisfied that HEFCW's powers are useful on a preventative day-to-day basis? Kirsty Williams AM: If I may disagree slightly, I don't think their powers are frightening. It's very clear what powers are available to HEFCW, and they're certainly more than just the ability to, maybe, lean on an institution. Clearly, there is a system by which there is the ability to, you know, ramp up and escalate levels of intervention in the sector by HEFCW, but I certainly wouldn't describe them as inflexible or not having weight. Dawn Bowden AM: I think they were saying it was difficult to use for swift interventions--they found it a bit cumbersome. They explained to us that they often take informal measures or actions in their role as regulator, and they've explained that the small size of the sector enables good relationships to be developed. How can such measures work in the tertiary education body when there clearly will be many more than the 10 providers? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, looking ahead to the new Bill, I would want to see and be very keen to ensure that there are sufficiently flexible--did you use the word soft--and soft regulatory powers that the commission could exercise. Those powers, for instance, could include the ability to offer advice and guidance, rather than, maybe, punitive interventions, and powers to undertake enhanced monitoring of institutions to ensure compliance with regulatory conditions. So, I would expect the commission to be able to have a series of abilities to intervene, from the soft, flexible type, which is non-punitive but actually allows people to go in and support institutions, through to something that would be, as I said, more punitive, if they felt that an institution was in danger of not providing quality or financial failure. Hefin David AM: Can I just come in there, on the point that was made? The issue that seemed to me to come from HEFCW and from the universities is that the dial seems to have only three steps. So, rather than having a graduated series of actions that they can take, it seems to step from--what did he call it--a'meeting without coffee'to-- Kirsty Williams AM: That's a very HEFCW thing to say. Hefin David AM: --potentially institutions going bankrupt, and there don't seem to be many steps in between that. I'd invite you to say whether you'd like to remedy that in future. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as I said at the beginning of the session, this is why this post-legislative scrutiny is useful, because we can reflect on that feedback. As I said, I would expect to be able to ensure that the commission had a range of powers that could address--from that soft power and those early conversations to being able to, as I said, issue, perhaps, advice and guidance to an institution, so there would be a more graduated escalation. Huw, is there anything else that I've missed out? Huw Morris: Just to build on what the Minister has said, there's a range of ways in which we interact with all institutions that are going to be in the tertiary sector, and some of that is about providing information. So, HEFCW provides information--it sends around circulars, it produces reports and it holds events. There's staff, management and leadership development activity, which can create a culture amongst the leaders of institutions, but also amongst their governing bodies, to help them move in a particular direction. We would hope that's in the direction of the civic university approach that the Minister has outlined. We use those mechanisms and informal interactions with FE college principals, with the work-based learning provider network, with sixth forms and others, and we would want to see, I hope, in the tertiary sector some alignment of those things. When things go badly wrong, there are a range of mechanisms. I think what stands behind HEFCW's comments is that before we had a loan-based system of student finance, there was a system of block grant allocations and conditions could be attached to those grant allocations by HEFCW. I don't think we're going to be going back to that system in the foreseeable future because of the pressures on public finances-- Hefin David AM: That wasn't how I understood it. I understood it to be the fact that you use these informal powers and then the next step up is quite a severe sanction and there's not much in between those. Huw Morris: So, in--. Shall I carry on? Kirsty Williams AM: Of course, yes. Huw Morris: In the Hazelkorn review, there's quite a lot of focus on that and looking to learn from other national systems where outcome agreements provide a broader measure of the range of things the institutions do and a mechanism for tracking how things are done through the provision of information back to the institution to help them know how they're doing. And potentially, in some of these other institutions, funding is linked to some of those things. Kirsty Williams AM: And, of course, what always has to be--. What we have to strike the balance of as well is at what point those powers seem to be--and the ability to direct--interfering with the principle of autonomy within an institution. So, there's that balance to be struck, isn't there, about creating a regulatory regime, which I'm very keen and the Act attempted to do, which was to enshrine institutional autonomy, and that's really, really important, but also a regulatory regime, the ability to influence and to develop and to deliver national outcomes and the power to intervene in that sector, which you know, better than probably anybody else in this room, guards that institutional autonomy very, very, very dear indeed. And that's the balance that we need to try and strike as we go forward with the new commission proposals. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. I think, in terms of the levels of measures--and I understand what you're saying--but I think what HEFCW were saying was that they try as far as possible to use informal measures and they are able to do that because of the size of the sector--just 10 institutions to work with. The post-16 sector, however many we're talking--50 plus providers--it's probably going to be less likely that they would be able to have that sort of relationship with the leaders in those institutions. So, the informal measures might not be as prevalent as they are currently, possibly. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, but also, what's incumbent upon me as the Minister is to ensure that the commission is set up in a way where it can have that relationship with the sector, because what's really important to remember is that HEFCW will be replaced. We're not asking HEFCW suddenly to go from regulating a small number of institutions to suddenly regulating 50. We'll be creating a commission that will be structured in such a way that it can have those relationships. Because, of course, whilst HEFCW will face changes, our relationship with and how we manage the FE sector and the apprenticeship sector will also shift. So, the point is that we need to create a commission that will still be able to be close to the sector, close enough to be able to provide that soft regulation, those really important relationships in a way--. So, it has to be created in such a way and resourced in such a way that it allows that to happen, and that's my intention. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Well, then, of course, the University of Wales said to us that they felt that there was the potential for HEFCW to issue directions enforceable by injunction to remedy minor matters. So, I think, from what you're saying, you wouldn't be expecting that to happen. Just the fact that they've got the power doesn't necessarily mean that that's what they're going to do. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's important to recognise when HEFCW can enforce its directions by way of an injunction. If they were to do that because a university was breaking fee limits or because there were real questions about the quality of the provision or whether a university was not complying with the financial management code--personally, I wouldn't describe those as minor matters, as a Minister, if we had an institution that was significantly falling down on quality and HEFCW were using these powers to intervene. I wouldn't describe that as a minor matter. Dawn Bowden AM: No. That's fair enough. And, actually, on that point, we've had some recent high-profile issues in Swansea and Trinity St David, and HEFCW still haven't yet used their powers of intervention. Do you find that surprising? Kirsty Williams AM: I think what they have done in these circumstances is, perhaps, used their ability to support those institutions through what, undoubtedly, have been challenging times. Given the fact that there are ongoing legal processes attached to Swansea University, I think it would not be appropriate for me to comment any further, because there are still matters in train with regard to that institution. But clearly, our expectation on HEFCW is to ensure that they are using their powers to support those universities, and I would expect them, if they felt necessary, to use the full remit of their powers if they felt that that was what they needed to do. Now, I have to trust their professional judgment that that has not been necessary to date, but our expectation is that they would do that if they felt it was necessary. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin David has some questions now on fee and access plans. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that neither the regulator nor the sector seem to have any confidence in fee and access plans? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the concept of a fee and access plan is an important concept. Whether we can do them better, whether we can reflect on what's happened to date and create a better system of what's included in a fee and access plan and how those fee and access plans can be monitored, there's an opportunity to do that in forthcoming legislation. Hefin David AM: So, have you been aware of specific issues yourself? Have they brought them to you? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, no, not in the sense that they've brought them to me to talk about specifically. From my perspective, fee and access plans are focused very much on inputs, and, really, I'd like to think about outputs and outcomes, more importantly--what are the outcomes of the fee and access plan, not necessarily just how much money has been spent on them. I think, certainly, to really understand the success of the fee and access plan, you have to question whether an annual basis is an appropriate timescale for a university to be working to, and whether we could have something that was focused over a longer period of time. Because, when you think about it, you write the plan and then you're into it, and then, the next thing you know, you're writing your next year's plan. So, I think there's an opportunity there to look to restructure. So, do I see a place for fee and access plans going forward, as part of our outcome agreements? Yes, I do. Can we do them differently to make them more effective? Yes, I think we can. Hefin David AM: So, why would introducing outcome agreements make them work any better? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think they're going to be a part of an outcome agreement--part of that wider expectation. So, fee and access plans are there to address an issue around, primarily, changing the nature of people who go to university and making sure that nobody is put off from pursuing that. So, that's part of a wider piece of work that I'd want to see as an outcome agreement. But, as I said, I think looking at outcomes for students and outcomes of that activity, rather than the inputs of the activity, over a longer period of time, is probably a more effective way of doing it. I think it's still--. In a way, it's difficult to make a final judgment on whether fee and access plans in their current format have worked, because we need to know what'll happen to those students in the future. But undoubtedly, despite the limitations of them, I do think we're making progress in terms of access, but I don't think we can necessarily point to the fee and access plans as being the driver for some of those improvements. Hefin David AM: No, I appreciate that, and some of the things you're saying reflect some of the discussions we've had, but what was clear is that the process and bureaucratic nature of the way you present fee and access plans doesn't work, particularly given the fact that, four years on, early fee and access plans are still being evaluated. There's a real problem there. So, what you're saying--can I just pin down what you're saying--is that we may be moving away from yearly fee and access plans to something that's longer term and outcome focused. Kirsty Williams AM: That's my preference. So, I think the principle--I'd like to think we can all agree around the principle of what a fee and access plan is hoping to achieve, but I think there are better ways of doing it, and I think we should take the opportunity of reform to look at how we can do it better. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, I think we're talking about the future of the Bill, the consultation on the PCET reforms closed in summer 2018--with these important issues in mind and things that are currently ongoing, have you had further dialogue since then with key stakeholders like, for example, Universities Wales and others? Kirsty Williams AM: On the Bill or on fee and access plans in particular? Hefin David AM: I'm thinking about fee and access plans as an issue that suggests that there is a need for deep consultation, so with that in mind, with things like that, have you had further discussion? Kirsty Williams AM: Oh my goodness me, civil servants in the department are constantly in discussion with a range of stakeholders as we continue to develop legislative proposals. I meet on a regular basis with both HEFCW--I meet separately with the vice-chancellors, and I've been very keen to develop a stronger working relationship with chairs, and perhaps we'll come on to issues of governance later. So, we are constantly discussing with stakeholders all options for change-- Hefin David AM: I suppose the message I'm getting as chair of the cross-party group on higher education is that there could still be more direct consultation with stakeholders. That's the message I've received. Now, I've got no evidence to say it has or hasn't happened, but that's the message I've received. Huw Morris: If I could just chip in for a moment, the Minister's outlined that there is very extensive, ongoing communication both ways with the sector, but the challenge of preparing a Bill is the balancing act between gathering in information--and there's been a general consultation process and a technical consultation process--and wanting to make sure that the Bill that's laid next year hasn't been discussed with anybody else before it comes to be considered by the Senedd. So, the broad principles have been discussed, but specific details of what goes into a Bill or policy instructions that inform a Bill haven't been the subject of consultation-- Hefin David AM: Because that happens at Stage 1. Huw Morris: Indeed, yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. Sorry, can I move on to the next item? Lynne Neagle AM: Oh, you're going on to the next section. Hefin David AM: Yes, unless there's anything specific-- Lynne Neagle AM: Yes, I just wanted to clarify, if we're moving to a longer term approach to this, how will the new body be able to establish that things are actually working, that the powers are working, if we're working on a five-year time frame? Kirsty Williams AM: As we've heard, we can't really properly assess fee and access plans in the current arrangements, because it takes time for those cohorts of students to go through and activities to go through. Being able to move to a system where fee and access plans, for instance, could be over a three-year period I think allows universities to be more strategic in some of their investments and some of their activities around fee and access. In a single-year plan, it's almost knee-jerk, it's the need to demonstrate that you're doing something, and doing that within that period of time, rather than a more strategic view--. Can I just say, I know it's not quite subject to this, but we're really moving forward in terms of access and broadening access into the HE sector. For me, student financial support is one aspect of it, but if we're really thinking about social mobility and attracting people into higher education that have never been part of higher education before, our early figures would suggest--they're early figures, and they're subject to change, but in terms of our change to our student support regime, we have seen a 58 per cent increase in the number of postgraduates applying for student support in Wales. When you think about it, when many of us went to university, a degree was the thing that set you apart. Now that more and more students are going to university, it is that postgraduate qualification that sets you apart, but your ability to carry on studying is often limited by access to financial support, so a 58 per cent increase in postgraduate I think is great for those individuals, but it's also great for our economy. We've seen a 35 per cent increase in part-time undergraduates that have been supported by the Student Loans Company; the Open University have reported a 67 per cent increase in students from Wales's most economically disadvantaged areas registering with them; a 57 per cent increase in disabled students; and a 30 per cent increase in black, minority ethnic learners. So, I think that's a really, really positive basis for our sector to continue to work on broadening access. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sorry, Hefin--carry on. Hefin David AM: I'll move on to managing risk, if that's okay. The feedback from Universities Wales suggests that, with the outcome of the 2015 Act, institutions with the strongest track records are more highly regulated than the riskier private alternative providers. Do you think that Act has struck the right balance? Kirsty Williams AM: I think the Act has created a system where the level of regulation is proportional to the amount and the nature of public moneys received by institutions. Hefin David AM: Okay. Those were the words used by Universities Wales-- Kirsty Williams AM: No, no, I'm not disagreeing. My view is: I believe that the Act has struck that proportionality. When you look at public moneys going into institutions, I think that the Act is proportionate, myself. Hefin David AM: So, do you think it's in the interests of students, then, to be at private institutions--? I've seen those private institutions and how they operate; I've seen them at first-hand--they don't operate to the same rigour as public institutions, and they're less regulated. Huw Morris: Can I just chip in? I think that the category'private'covers quite a wide range of things, and many private institutions are also charities. We don't have the presence of some of the large private charities that are present in other countries, but Stanford and Harvard would count as private universities. So, I think we need to be careful in focusing on the inherent quality of things. We've made charitable status a key reference point in the operation of things at the moment. I think there has been attention drawn to some private providers, particularly in England, but I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush, necessarily. Hefin David AM: But they fall outwith--if they're not charitable providers running validated courses, for example, they fall outwith the strength of regulation that is currently in place on the universities in Wales. Kirsty Williams AM: So, we would regulate them on a course-by-course basis, so it's back to the issue of proportionality, isn't it? So, you are automatically regulated for all your courses, if you're one of our main universities, but there is a process that is run by HEFCW on a course-by-course basis to validate alternative providers. And as Huw said, I think we should recognise the nature of that is very, very, very small in Wales, and there is a process to ensure quality provision. If there were concerns about the quality of that provision, that course could be deregulated. Hefin David AM: And I'm aware that there are a small number of private institutions in Wales, but are you concerned that in the future the landscape may change, particularly with the opportunity to recruit more part-time students? Do you think the landscape may change in future and that the 2015 Act, as designed, wasn't equipped for that, and will the next Act, then, be equipped? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's right to say that maybe the previous legislation didn't futureproof for changes. I'm not anticipating a mass influx of alternative providers, in the sense that we've seen across the border, but we will need to ensure that the new commission has powers to regulate and to futureproof. Hefin David AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. We had some evidence from the University and College Union that were concerned about the governance of universities, actually, as being a bigger problem than the regulatory framework in many ways. Can you tell us, perhaps, how the HE Act addresses the issue of poor governance, or is it really just limited to responding to the symptoms rather than the poor governance itself? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think it's true and fair to say that the Bill does not directly address issues around governance in the sector. HEFCW do have well-established assurance practices in relation to governance that would predate the 2015 legislation. But governance--we've talked briefly about some recent history within the sector that I think has certainly brought the issue of governance to the fore once again, and I think there are two important things that we're trying to do about that in the current time, prior to any legislative changes. The first is, as I just said to Hefin, I have sought to have a more direct relationship with chairs of universities and have that one-to-one relationship with them, not in the presence of their vice-chancellors. I challenge them, they challenge me, and I think we've deliberately tried to establish a regular routine of that since I took office. And you'll be aware that, collaboratively--and I'm glad that this has been done in this way because I think if you do it this way, we're more likely to get some success and change--Universities Wales and HEFCW have worked together to undertake an independent review of governance. And I think it's really important that parties have come together to recognise the issues and to agree to take action, because I think if we'd have tried to impose something, we'd have more resistance. So, there is an independent review going on at the moment-- Dawn Bowden AM: Is that the risk review process in--? Kirsty Williams AM: That's the Gillian Camm review. This is a review that, as I said, Universities Wales and HEFCW have agreed to do together. It's chaired by Gillian Camm, who is the chair of the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education, and she is doing an independent review to advise on changes to governance. And I welcome that, I'm very supportive of that, and that's happening at the moment. As I said, I'm glad that there's been recognition from within the sector themselves that they need to make sure, and they need to give confidence, that governance arrangements are what they should be. Dawn Bowden AM: So, is that something that you're going to be taking into the PCET Bill, do you think? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, absolutely. We're exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition in respect of good governance, and a commission would be able to set expectations with regard to good governance. I think one of the concerns for me--and I know that this is a concern that is shared by the UCU--is the diversity of governance and who finds themselves in these really important positions. HEFCW don't hold figures on it, but from an approximation that I've asked officials to do for me, currently in the universities that we have, I would say that men make up around 56 per cent of membership of universities'governing bodies; women--44 per cent; BME--as low as 4 per cent. Of course, in individual institutions, it does vary, but I think there is some way to go to making sure that our governing bodies are diverse and that there's an opportunity to look at the student voice in governance going forward, the staff voice in governance going forward, and these are things that we hope to have discussions on whilst we bring the legislation forward. Dawn Bowden AM: But also, I guess--sorry, Chair--a greater understanding, that anybody going in to become a governor of one of these institutions has a greater understanding of what is expected of them. Do you think that that's a gap that needs to be plugged? Huw Morris: One of the things that HEFCW have led on with AdvanceHE, the body that encompasses the leadership foundation, is a development programme for governing bodies, and that started earlier--well, it's been going on for some time, but it was recommenced earlier this year, with a session for all of the chairs of universities in Wales. And I believe--I'll need to check this--that there are plans to engage with each of the governing bodies, because, as you rightly say, and this lies behind a lot of what we've been discussing, the activities of these institutions have become much more complex over recent years, and so there is a need for that training and development and understanding also of the fast-changing nature of that activity. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on, can I ask whether it's your plan to legislate on that, as they've done in Scotland? Kirsty Williams AM: As I said, I don't want to pre-empt scrutiny of the Bill, because we need to be able to come to the committee and do that in the entirety, rather than picking off individual bits of it, but we are absolutely exploring how the Bill could introduce a regulatory condition with regard to governance. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you very much. We've got some questions now from Sian on quality assurance. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. We've heard evidence regarding the difficulties caused by HEFCW having a legal duty to quality-assure all the provision in two further education colleges. That sounds to me like some kind of an anomaly or an unintended consequence of the Act. Could you clarify that and explain the situation in that instance? Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. My understanding--and as I said, it's a bit difficult, because I can't put myself into the thought process of the Minister at the time and what his expectation was. But, certainly, my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, it was an expectation built into the Act that HEFCW and Estyn would work together on these matters. The Act built on what were the quality assessment arrangements in the 1992 Act, which required HEFCW to secure arrangements for the assessment of the quality of education provided by funding institutions. So, as a consequence of that approach, HEFCW's quality assessment duty currently encompasses all the education provided by or on behalf of a regulated institution. So, it is complicated, and Huw can help me out here if I get it wrong, but my understanding is that it was not an unintended consequence, that was the expectation of what would happen when the legislation was passed. Huw. Huw Morris: I would completely agree with what the Minister has said. Kirsty Williams AM: As always. [Laughter. ] At least in public, Huw. Huw Morris: There is the expectation that they will work together in concert. There's a lot of joint operation. I think, going forward, we would expect that to continue. We're looking to the new Bill to try to make that clearer. That was a theme in the general and technical consultation exercises that we've engaged in over the last couple of years. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're happy, therefore, that that partnership has worked. Are you happy with that? Kirsty Williams AM: Certainly, in our consultation for the upcoming Act, we've generally heard, certainly from our further education colleges, that they've been quite content with the arrangements. No concerns about it, certainly from further education colleges. Huw Morris: There are differences in the systems of quality assurance as they've historically applied to FE and HE, but I understand that that has meant that, as FE colleges become more interested in HE, they've had to learn new ways, and that's taken a little bit of time. But, I'm not aware of any dissatisfaction. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, which moves us on to this idea of having one quality assurance body or one quality assurance framework. Is that your intention and how will that work in practice? Kirsty Williams AM: I am aware, and we've listened to stakeholders'concerns regarding proposals to introduce a single quality assessment body. As I said, we recognise that stakeholders are broadly content with the current situation with regard to Estyn and QAA. So, we've been listening to that, following the technical consultation, and policy officials are working through options in regard to ensuring what quality assurance will look like in the commission. As I said, I don't want to pre-empt bringing forward the legislation, but the principles underlying any assurance regime would need to be coherent, need to be effective and need to be comprehensive. What we're also very clear about, and I think it is important to say, is that any quality framework covering higher education will be compatible with ENQA, which I think is really, really important going forward. And by an extension of that, it would be compatible with current UK-wide baseline standards. So, we don't want to create specific problems for the HE sector in Wales. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, you have touched on this, there is substantial concern in the sector about this offer to move to one assurance body for the tertiary sector. One vice-chancellor has told us: Kirsty Williams AM: Well, sometimes, I think it is necessary, maybe, to cause a stir. If we don't change things, it does beg the point of,'Why are any of us here if we're not here to sometimes move things forward?'And change is challenging always, but I would like to reassure all of our vice-chancellors and our sector as a whole that we're not going to do anything in the quality assurance regime that would risk what is the very high reputation and standards that Welsh universities currently comply with or would set them apart from institutions across the border or in a European context. Huw. Huw Morris: I agree, obviously. I think the fear is misplaced, but coming back to another theme in the conversation so far about futureproofing, what we're seeing in the figures that the Minister outlined to you earlier about the growth in postgraduate and the growth in part-time is the desire of a greater number of people at different ages to engage in higher and tertiary education, and quite often that will be in a workplace or it will be in a non-conventional institutional setting. Historically, the quality assurance regimes for work-based learning have tended to sit with Estyn; the assurance regimes for the universities have sat with the QAA. There's quite a lot of learning that all sides have got to engage in if we're going to be able to have continued high quality in these new areas that are being explored. That's an issue not just in Wales. The Augar report, which was published earlier this year in England, drew attention to this as being a major problem in the relationship over the border between Ofsted and the QAA. So, I think we're not looking to impose one institution on anybody, but we are looking to encourage greater synergy in the ways in which quality assurance and enhancement is undertaken in those different areas of activity. Sian Gwenllian AM: And finally, therefore, looking at overseas providers. Currently, of course, universities can award their degrees to students being taught by providers overseas. We know this created problems for the University of Wales in 2011. They faced a scandal; that's probably the best word to use there. Will the new Bill address these issues? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, certainly transnational education does present real opportunities for Welsh institutions, but if not managed appropriately and regulated appropriately can cause real risks to reputation to our sector. When I meet with vice-chancellors in universities in different parts of the world, and when I am visiting different countries, one of the great things that I'm able to say is that we have a sector that provides fantastic quality of teaching, excellence in research and a wonderful student experience, and that is undermined if institutions find themselves undertaking TNE activities that put that at risk. So, it's an important consideration for the health of the whole sector that any TNE undertaken by a Welsh institution has the appropriate quality guarantees built into that because it's a problem not just for an individual institution, but it could undermine the very strong reputation that the Welsh sector has as a whole. Huw, was there anything further about TNE? Huw Morris: Well, just to say that we are live to that, as I know HEFCW and the QAA are. We've had conversations with both in the recent past. There is quality assurance of offshore activity through the QAA. When they visit institutions with their reviews they will look at a selection of those overseas activities and there are periodic thematic reviews of the activity in particular countries. I think we would hope and believe that HEFCW, in its conversations with the QAA, would be keeping that under review to minimise the risk and maximise the opportunities. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, you're not actually looking to use the new legislation to strengthen the regulation around this. Huw Morris: The arrangements at the moment are that HEFCW uses the QAA to do the reviews and the inspections. I don't think we're currently looking to mandate the detail of how that should happen. The system at the moment works through co-operation between the institutions and the regulator to make sure the quality assurance system is improving and enhancing things. I think we would look to that as a primary mechanism. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank you both for attending this morning and answering all our questions? As usual, you will be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you both for your attendance this morning. Kirsty Williams AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Item 3 then is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from the Minister for Education regarding the revised additional learning needs implementation plan. Paper to note 2 is additional information from HEFCW, following the meeting on 18 July, in relation to our post-legislative scrutiny of the Higher Education (Wales) Act. And paper to note 3 is a letter from us to the Welsh Local Government Association on the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. This is the letter that we agreed we would send last week. Can I ask Members if they're happy to note those? Yes. Thank you very much. Item 4 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting and for item 1 on 2 October? Are Members content? Thank you.

The meeting between the Children, Young People and Education Committee and the Welsh Government was considered as a post-legislative scrutiny session on the Higher Education (Wales) Act 2015. To start with, Kirsty Williams AM suggested although the Bill was taken forward by a different Minister in a different administration, it was still valuable to discuss in the current context. The Act had partly fulfilled the Government's objectives in regulating institutions, safeguarding contribution, managing fair access and protecting the principle of institutional autonomy. Kirsty Williams AM also pointed out that new methods should be included to further regulate, co-ordinating and fund the sector. When it comes to the future of the Act, the meeting agreed that tertiary education providers should contribute to national goals and outcomes as part of the civic mission, and students'interests must be fully preserved. Meanwhile, some participants argued that HEFCW's powers were inflexible and fee plans from private providers were hard to regulate. Kirsty Williams AM agreed that a more flexible connection between the regulating sectors and the others should be attained. Besides, the meeting also talked about managing risk and agreed that the Act, in the future should include more alternative providers for students who were receiving long-term support. In the end, Kirsty Williams AM praised the contribution from overseas providers in supporting transnational education in Wales and agreed that rights of students in Wales should always be put in the first place.

tr-sq-28

tr-sq-28_0

Summarize the discussion about releasing meeting data and allowing people to cut things out Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

The team decided to release their data on July 15th, but they still wanted to give people time to bleep things from the transcripts. There was skepticism that they could actually reach out to people and get everyone's consent that they were okay with whatever was being released.

tr-sq-29

tr-sq-29_0

What did the team think about sending an email to ask for changes? Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

The team thought that people would not respond to their emails, which would be compounded by them being out of town over the summer. Based on knowledge about similar data collection, they thought that emails should be enough, but skepticism about getting consent with emails prevailed.

tr-sq-30

tr-sq-30_0

What did Grad F think about getting consent? Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

Grad F was responsible for bringing up the topic. Apparently, no one had replied to the emails allowing people to bleep things out so far. According to Grad F, as long as the email was sent out, the team was covered. Grad F thought this had been settled when the project started and did not need to be revisited.

tr-sq-31

tr-sq-31_0

Summarize the discussion about new headphones and disk space Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

The team decided that it would be a good idea to purchase headphones. They also ordered a hundred gigabytes of disk space though they thought an extra eighteen for backup would not be a bad idea. This was good because the team was currently constrained by space.

tr-sq-32

tr-sq-32_0

What did postdoc A think about new headphones? Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

Postdoc A thought that the original headphones had low gain, so he purchased new earphones. He informed the team that he just bought them from Cambridge SoundWorks down the street. They always have them in stock.

tr-sq-33

tr-sq-33_0

What did the Professor think about headphones and disk space? Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

The professor thought that anyone who needed headphones should purchase them since they were not very expensive. He wanted to get the discussion about disk space out of the way. He informed the team that he had ordered a hundred gigabytes.

tr-gq-34

tr-gq-34_0

Summarize the meeting Grad F: OK. PhD C: Adam, what is the mike that, uh, Jeremy's wearing? Grad F: It's the ear - plug mike. Postdoc A: Ear - plug. PhD E: That's good. PhD C: Is that a wireless, or {disfmarker}? Oh. Grad F: No. Grad G: It's wired. Professor B: Oh! Postdoc A: Is that {disfmarker} Does that mean you can't hear anything during the meeting? Grad D: It's old - school. Grad F: Huh? What? Huh? Professor B: Should we, uh, close the door, maybe? Grad F: It {disfmarker} it's a fairly good mike, actually. Professor B: So it's {disfmarker} Yeah. Huh. Grad F: Well, I shouldn't say it's a good mike. All I really know is that the signal level is OK. I don't know if it's a {disfmarker} the quality. Professor B: Well, that's a Grad F: Ugh! So I didn't send out agenda items because until five minutes ago we only had one agenda item and now we have two. So. {vocalsound} And, uh. Professor B: OK. So, just to repeat the thing bef that we said last week, it was there's this suggestion of alternating weeks on {vocalsound} more, uh, automatic speech recognition related or not? Was that sort of {pause} the division? Grad F: Right. Professor B: So which week are we in? Grad F: Well {disfmarker} We haven't really started, but I thought we more {disfmarker} we more or less did Meeting Recorder stuff last week, so I thought we could do, uh {disfmarker} Professor B: I thought we had a thing about speech recognition last week too. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: But I figure also if they're short agenda items, we could also do a little bit of each. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. I seem to be having difficulty getting this adjusted. Here we go. Professor B: OK. Grad F: So, uh, as most of you should know, I did send out the consent form thingies and, uh, so far no one has made any {disfmarker} Ach! {comment} {comment} any comments on them. So, no on no one has bleeped out anything. Professor B: Um. Yeah. Grad F: So. I don't expect anyone to. But. Professor B: Um. {vocalsound} So, w what follows? At some point y you go around and get people to sign something? Grad F: No. We had spoken w about this before Professor B: Yeah, but I've forgotten. Grad F: and we had decided that they have {disfmarker} they only needed to sign once. And the agreement that they already signed simply said that we would give them an opportunity. So as long as we do that, we're covered. Professor B: And how long of an opportunity did you tell them? Grad F: Uh, July fifteenth. Professor B: July fifteenth. Oh, so they have a plenty of time, and y Grad F: Yep. Professor B: Given that it's that long, um, um {disfmarker} Why was that date chosen? You just felt you wanted to {disfmarker}? Grad F: Jane told me July fifteenth. So, that's what I set it. Postdoc A: Oh. I just meant that that was {pause} the release date that you had on the {pause} data. Professor B: Oh, OK. Grad F: Oh. I {disfmarker} I didn't understand that there was something specific. Postdoc A: I, uh {disfmarker} I thought {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} y you had {disfmarker} Professor B: I don't {disfmarker} Grad F: I had heard July fifteenth, so that's what I put. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: No, the only {disfmarker} th the only {pause} mention I recall about that was just that July fifteenth or so is when {vocalsound} this meeting starts. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. That's why. Professor B: Oh, I see. Postdoc A: You said you wanted it to be available then. Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: I didn't mean it to be the hard deadline. Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: It's fine with me if it is, or we cou But I thought it might be good to remind people two weeks prior to that Professor B: w Postdoc A: in case, uh {disfmarker} you know," by the way {pause} this is your last {disfmarker}" Professor B: Right. Postdoc A: Uh. Yeah. Professor B: We probably should have talked about it, cuz i because if we wanna be able to give it to people July fifteenth, if somebody's gonna come back and say" OK, I don't want this and this and this used" , uh, clearly we need some time to respond to that. Right? Grad F: Yeah. As I said, we {disfmarker} I just got one date Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: Damn! Grad F: and that's the one I used. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: So. But I can send a follow - up. I mean, it's almost all us. I mean the people who are in the meeti this meeting was, uh, these {disfmarker} the meetings that {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} are in set one. PhD C: Was my {disfmarker} was my response OK? Postdoc A: That's right. PhD C: I just wrote you {disfmarker} replied to the email saying they're all fine. Grad F: Right. I mean, that's fine. PhD C: OK, good. Grad F: I {disfmarker} we don't {disfmarker} My understanding of what we {pause} had agreed upon when we had spoken about this months ago was that, uh, we don't actually need a reply. PhD C: That makes it easy. Grad F: We just need to tell them that they can do it if they want. Professor B: OK. I just didn't remember, but {disfmarker} Grad F: And so no reply is no changes. Postdoc A: And he's got it so that the default thing you see when you look at the page is" OK" . Professor B: OK. Postdoc A: So that's very clear all the way down the page," OK" . And they have two options they can change it to. One of them is {pause}" censor" , and the other one is" incorrect" . Is it {disfmarker} is {disfmarker} your word is" incorrect" ? Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Which means also we get feedback on {pause} if {pause} um, there's something that they w that needs to be {pause} adjusted, because, I mean, these are very highly technical things. I mean, it's an added, uh, level of checking on the accuracy of the transcription, as I see it. But in any case, people can agree to things that are wrong. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: So. Grad F: Yeah. The reason I did that it was just so that people would not censor {disfmarker} not ask to have stuff removed because it was transcribed incorrectly, Postdoc A: And the reason I liked it was because {disfmarker} Grad F: as opposed to, uh {disfmarker} Postdoc A: was because it, um {disfmarker} it gives them the option of, uh, being able to correct it. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: Approve it and correct it. And {pause} um. So, you have {pause} it nicely set up so they email you and, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: When they submit the form, it gets processed and emailed to me. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. And I wanted to say the meetings that are involved in that set are Robustness and Meeting Recorder. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: The German ones will be ready for next week. Those are three {disfmarker} three of those. A different set of people. And we can impose {disfmarker} PhD C: The German ones? Postdoc A: Uh, well. PhD H: Yeah. Those {disfmarker} uh {disfmarker} Professor B: NSA. Postdoc A: OK. I spoke loosely. The {disfmarker} the German, French {disfmarker} Sorry, the German, {vocalsound} Dutch, and Spanish ones. PhD E: Spanish. Yeah. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD C: Oh, those are the NSA meetings? PhD E: The non - native {disfmarker} PhD H: Those are {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. Uh - huh. Professor B: German, Dutch, Swiss and Spanish. PhD C: Oh, oh! OK. PhD E: The all non - native {disfmarker} Postdoc A: That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's r Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: Uh - huh. PhD C: OK. I'd {disfmarker} I d Postdoc A: Yeah. {pause} It's the other group. Professor B: I It was the network {disfmarker} network services group. PhD C: OK. Postdoc A: Uh - huh. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: I didn't mean to {pause} isolate them. Professor B: Otherwise known as the German, Dutch, and Spanish. Postdoc A: Yeah. Sorry. It was {disfmarker} it was not the best characterization. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: But what {disfmarker} {vocalsound} what I meant to say was that it's the other group that's not {disfmarker} n no m no overlap with our present members. And then maybe it'd be good to set an explicit deadline, something like {pause} a week {pause} before that, uh, J July fifteenth date, or two weeks before. Professor B: I mean, I would suggest we discuss {disfmarker} I mean, if we're going to have a policy on it, that we discuss the length of time that we want to give people, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so that we have a uniform thing. So, tha that's a month, which is fine. I mean, it seems {disfmarker} PhD C: Twelve hours. Grad F: Well, the only thing I said in the email is that {pause} the data is going to be released on the fifteenth. I didn't give any other deadline. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: So my feeling is if someone after the fifteenth says," wow I suddenly found something" , we'll delete it from our record. We just won't delete it from whatever's already been released. Postdoc A: Hmm. That's a little bit difficult. Grad F: What else can we do? Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: If someone says" hey, look, I {pause} found something in this meeting and {pause} it's libelous and I want it removed" . What can we do? Postdoc A: Well. {pause} That's true. Grad F: We have to remove it. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I agree with that part, but I think that it would {disfmarker} it, uh {disfmarker} we need to have, uh, a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} a message to them very clearly that {vocalsound} beyond this date, you can't make additional changes. Professor B: I mean, um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} {vocalsound} i I think that somebody might {pause} request something even though we say that. But I think it's good to at least start some place like that. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Good. Professor B: So if we agreed, {vocalsound} OK, how long is a reasonable amount of time for people to have {disfmarker} if we say two weeks, or if we say a month, I think we should just say that {disfmarker} say that, you know, i a as {pause} um, {vocalsound}" per the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the, uh, page you signed, you have the ability to look over this stuff" and so forth" and, uh, because we w" these, uh {disfmarker} I would {disfmarker} I would imagine some sort of generic thing that would say" because we, uh, will continually be making these things available {vocalsound} to other researchers, uh, this can't be open - ended and so, uh, uh, please give us back your response within this am you know, within this amount of time" , whatever time we agree upon. Grad F: Well, did you read the email and look at the pages I sent? Professor B: Did I? No, I haven't yet. No, just {disfmarker} Grad F: No. OK, well why don't you do that and then make comments on what you want me to change? Professor B: No, no. I'm not saying that you should change anything. I I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} what I'm {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I'm trying to spark a discussion hopefully among people who have read it so that {disfmarker} that you can {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you can, uh, decide on something. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So I'm not telling you what to decide. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: I'm just saying you should decide something, Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: and then {disfmarker} Grad F: I already did decide something, and that's what's in the email. Postdoc A: Yeah, yeah. OK, so {disfmarker} Grad F: And if you disagree with it, why don't you read it and give me comments on it? Postdoc A: Yeah. Well {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think that there's one missing line. Professor B: Well, the one thing that I did read and that you just repeated to me {pause} was that you gave the specific date of July fifteenth. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: And you also just said that the reason you said that was because someone said it to you. So what I'm telling you {pause} is that what you should do is come up with a length of time that you guys think is enough Grad F: Right. Professor B: and you should use that rather than {pause} this date that you just got from somewhere. That's all I'm saying. Grad F: OK. Professor B: OK? Postdoc A: I ha I have one question. This is in the summer period and presumably people may be out of town. But we can make the assumption, can't we? that, um, they will be receiving email, uh, most of the month. Right? Because if someone {disfmarker} Professor B: It {disfmarker} well, it {disfmarker} well, you're right. Sometimes somebody will be {pause} away and, uh, you know, there's, uh {disfmarker} for any length of time that you {vocalsound} uh, choose {pause} there is some person sometime who will not {pause} end up reading it. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: That's {disfmarker} it's, you know, just a certain risk to take. PhD H: S so maybe when {disfmarker} Am I on, by the way? Grad F: I don't know. You should be. PhD H: Oh. Hello? Hello? Grad F: You should be channel B. PhD H: Oh, OK. Alright. So. The, um {disfmarker} Maybe we should say in {disfmarker} w you know, when the whole thing starts, when they sign the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the agreement {vocalsound} that {disfmarker} you know, specify exactly uh, what, you know, how {disfmarker} how they will be contacted and they can, you know {disfmarker} they can be asked to give a phone number and an email address, or both. And, um, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We did that, I {disfmarker} I believe. PhD H: Right. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: So. {vocalsound} A And, then, you know, say very clearly that if they don't {disfmarker} if we don't hear from them, you know, as Morgan suggested, by a certain time or after a certain {vocalsound} period after we contact them {vocalsound} that is implicitly giving their agreement. Grad F: Well, they've already signed a form. Postdoc A: And the form says {disfmarker} PhD E: And nobody {disfmarker} nobody really reads it anyway. PhD H: Right. Grad F: So. And the s and the form was approved by Human Subjects, PhD H: Says that. Right. Postdoc A: Uh, the f PhD H: Well, if that's i tha if that's already {disfmarker} if {disfmarker} Grad F: so, eh, that's gonna be a little hard to modify. Postdoc A: Well, the form {disfmarker} Well, the form doesn't say, if {disfmarker} uh, you know," if you don't respond by X number of days or X number of weeks {disfmarker}" PhD H: I see. Uh {disfmarker} Oh, OK. So what does it say about the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the process of {disfmarker} of, uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} y the review process? Postdoc A: It doesn't have a time limit. That you'll be provided access to the transcripts and then, uh, allowed to {pause} remove things that you'd like to remove, before it goes to the general {disfmarker} uh, larger audience. PhD H: Oh, OK. Hmm. Right. Grad F: Here. Postdoc A: There you go. Grad F: You can read what you already signed. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: I guess when I {pause} read it, um {disfmarker} PhD H: OK. PhD E: I'm not as diligent as Chuck, but I had the feeling I should probably respond and tell Adam, like," I got this and I will do it by this date, and if you don't hear from me by then {disfmarker}" You know, in other words responding to your email {pause} once, right away, saying" as soon as you get this could you please respond." Grad F: Right. PhD E: And then if you {disfmarker} if the person thinks they'll need more time because they're out of town or whatever, they can tell you at that point? Because {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, I just {disfmarker} I didn't wanna do that, because I don't wanna have a discussion with every person {pause} if I can avoid it. PhD E: Well, it's {disfmarker} Grad F: So what I wanted to do was just send it out and say" on the fifteenth, the data is released, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Grad F: if you wanna do something about it, do something about it, but that's it" . Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I kind of like this. PhD E: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: OK. So, we're assuming that {disfmarker} PhD H: Well, that's {disfmarker} that would be great if {disfmarker} but you should probably have a {pause} legal person look at this and {pause} make sure it's OK. Because if you {disfmarker} if you, uh, do this {vocalsound} and you {disfmarker} then there's a dispute later and, uh, some {disfmarker} {vocalsound} you know, someone who understands these matters concludes that they didn't have, uh, you know, enough opportunity to actually {vocalsound} exercise their {disfmarker} their right {disfmarker} PhD E: Or they {disfmarker} they might never have gotten the email, because although they signed this, they don't know by which date to expect your email. And so {pause} someone whose machine is down or whatever {disfmarker} I mean, we have no {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: in internally we know that people are there, Grad F: Well, OK. l Let me {disfmarker} Let me reverse this. PhD E: but we have no confirmation that they got the mail. Grad F: So let's say someone {disfmarker} I send this out, and someone doesn't respond. Do we delete every meeting that they were in? PhD E: Well, then {disfmarker} Grad F: I don't think so. PhD E: It {disfmarker} we're hoping that doesn't happen, PhD H: No. PhD E: but that's why there's such a thing as registered mail Grad F: That will happen. PhD E: or {disfmarker} PhD H: That will happen. PhD E: Right. Grad F: That will absolutely happen. Because people don't read their email, or they'll read and say" I don't care about that, I'm not gonna delete anything" and they don just won't reply to it. PhD H: Maybe {disfmarker} uh, do we have mailing addresses for these people? Grad F: No. We have what they put on the speaker form, PhD H: No. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {comment} {vocalsound} Most {disfmarker} Grad F: which was just generic contact information. PhD H: Oh. Postdoc A: But the ones that we're dealing with now are all local, PhD H: Well, then {disfmarker} Postdoc A: except the ones who {disfmarker} I mean, we {disfmarker} we're totally in contact with all the ones in those two groups. PhD H: Mmm. OK. Postdoc A: So maybe, uh, I {disfmarker} you know, that's not that many people and if I {disfmarker} if, uh {disfmarker} i i there is an advantage to having them admit {disfmarker} and if I can help with {disfmarker} with processing that, I will. It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} there is an advantage to having them be on record as having received the mail and indicating {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. I mean I thought we had discussed this, like, a year ago. Postdoc A: Yes, we did. Grad F: And so it seems like this is a little odd for it to be coming up yet again. Postdoc A: You're right. Well, I {disfmarker} you know. But sometimes {disfmarker} Professor B: Well, we {disfmarker} we haven't experienced it before. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: That's right. Professor B: Right? So {disfmarker} PhD E: You'll either wonder {pause} at the beginning or you'll wonder at the end. Postdoc A: Need to get it right. PhD E: I mean, there's no way to get around {disfmarker} I It's pretty much the same am amount of work except for an additional email just saying they got the email. Postdoc A: Yeah. PhD E: And maybe it's better legally to wonder before {disfmarker} you know, a little bit earlier than {disfmarker} Grad F: Well {disfmarker} Postdoc A: It's much easier to explain {pause} this way. Grad F: OK. Well, why don't you talk {pause} t Postdoc A: T t to have it on record. Grad F: Morgan, can you talk to our lawyer about it, and find out what the status is on this? Cuz I don't wanna do something that we don't need to. Postdoc A: Yeah, but w Mmm. Grad F: Because what {disfmarker} I'm telling you, people won't respond to the email. No matter what you do, you there're gonna be people who {pause} you're gonna have to make a lot of effort to get in contact with. Postdoc A: Well, then we make the effort. Grad D: I mean, i it's k Grad F: And do we want to spend that effort? PhD H: Hmm. Postdoc A: We make the effort. Grad D: It's kind of like signing up for a mailing list. They have opt in and opt out. And there are two different ways. I mean, and either way works probably, I mean. Postdoc A: Except I really think in this case {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm agr I agree with Liz, that we need to be {pause} in the clear and not have to after the fact say" oh, but I assumed" , and" oh, I'm sorry that your email address was just accumulating mail without notifying you" , you know. Professor B: If this is a purely administrative task, we can actually have administration do it. Postdoc A: Oh, excellent. Professor B: But the thing is that, you know, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think, without going through a whole expensive thing with our lawyers, {vocalsound} from my previous conversations with them, my {disfmarker} my sense very {pause} much is that we would want something on record {pause} as indicating that they actually were aware of this. Postdoc A: Yes. Grad F: Well, we had talked about this before Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and I thought that we had even gone by the lawyers asking about that and they said you have to s they've already signed away the f with that form {disfmarker} that they've already signed once. Postdoc A: I don't remember that this issue of {pause} the time period allowed for response was ever covered. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. We never really talked about that. Grad F: OK. PhD E: Or the date at which they would be receiving the email from you. Postdoc A: Or {disfmarker} or how they would indicate {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: They probably forgot all about it. Professor B: We certainly didn't talk, uh, about {disfmarker} with them at all about, uh, the manner of them being {disfmarker} {vocalsound} made the, uh, uh, materials available. PhD E: Yeah. PhD H: We do it like with these {disfmarker} Professor B: That was something that was sort of just within our implementation. Grad F: OK. PhD H: We can use it {disfmarker} we can use a {disfmarker} a ploy like they use to, um {disfmarker} you know, that when they serve, like {disfmarker} uh, uh, uh {disfmarker} {comment} uh, you know, like dead - beat dads, they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they make it look like they won something in the lottery and then they open the envelope Grad D: And they're served. PhD H: and that {disfmarker} Right? Because {disfmarker} and then the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the thing is served. So you just make it, you know," oh, you won {disfmarker} you know, go to this web site and you've, uh {disfmarker} you're {disfmarker}" PhD E: That's why you never open these things that come in the mail. Postdoc A: That one. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Well, it's just, we've gone from one extreme to the other, where at one point, a few months ago, Morgan was {disfmarker} you were saying let's not do anything, PhD H: Right. {vocalsound} Right. No, it I {disfmarker} it might {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Well, it doesn't matter. PhD H: i i it {disfmarker} it might well be the case {disfmarker} Grad F: and now we're {disfmarker} we're saying we have to follow up each person and get a signature? PhD H: it might {disfmarker} Right. Grad F: I mean, what are we gonna doing here? PhD H: It might well be the case that {disfmarker} that this is perfectly {disfmarker} you know, this is enough to give us a basis t to just, eh, assume their consent if they don't reply. Professor B: Well. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: But, I'm not {disfmarker} you know, me not being a lawyer, I wouldn't just wanna do that without {pause} having the {disfmarker} the expert, uh, opinion on that. Postdoc A: And how many people? Al - altogether we've got twenty people. These people are people who read their email almost all the time. Grad F: Then I think we had better find out, so that we can find a {disfmarker} PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Let me look at this again. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I really don't see that it's a problem. I {disfmarker} I think that it's a common courtesy to ask them {disfmarker} uh, to expect for them to, uh, be able to have @ @ {comment} us try to contact them, Grad F: For {disfmarker} for th Postdoc A: u just in case they hadn't gotten their email. I think they'd appreciate it. Professor B: Yeah. My {disfmarker} Adam, my {disfmarker} my view before was about {pause} the nature of what was {disfmarker} of the presentation, Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: of {disfmarker} of how {pause} my {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} the things that we're questioning were along the lines of how easy {disfmarker} uh, h how m how much implication would there be that it's likely you're going to be changing something, as opposed to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: That was the kind of dispute I was making before. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. I remember that. Professor B: But, um, the attorneys, I {disfmarker} uh, I can guarantee you, the attorneys will always come back with {disfmarker} and we have to decide how stringent we want to be in these things, but they will always come back with saying {vocalsound} that, um, you need to {disfmarker} you want to have someth some paper trail or {disfmarker} which includes electronic trail {disfmarker} {vocalsound} that they have, uh, in fact {pause} O K'd it. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So, um, I think that if you f i if {pause} we send the email as you have and if there's half the people, say, who don't respond {pause} at all by, you know, some period of time, {vocalsound} we can just make a list of these people and hand it to, uh {disfmarker} you know, just give it to me and I'll hand it to administrative staff or whatever, Grad F: Right. Professor B: and they'll just call them up and say, you know," have you {disfmarker} Is {disfmarker} is this OK? And would you please mail {disfmarker} you know, mail Adam that it is, if i if it, you know, is or not." So, you know, we can {disfmarker} we can do that. PhD E: The other thing that there's a psychological effect that {disfmarker} at least for most people, that if they've responded to your email saying" yes, I will do it" or" yes, I got your email" , they're more likely to actually do it {comment} {pause} later {pause} than to just ignore it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. PhD E: And of course we don't want them to bleep things out, but it {disfmarker} it's a little bit better if we're getting the {disfmarker} their, uh, final response, once they've answered you once than if they never answer you'd {comment} at al at all. That's how these mailing houses work. So, I mean, it's not completely lost work because it might benefit us in terms of getting {pause} responses. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD E: You know, an official OK from somebody {pause} is better than no answer, even if they responded that they got your email. And they're probably more likely to do that once they've responded that they got the email. Postdoc A: I also think they'd just simply appreciate it. I think it's a good {disfmarker} a good way of {disfmarker} of fostering goodwill among our subjects. Well, our participants. Professor B: I think the main thing is {disfmarker} I mean, what lawyers do is they always look at worst cases. Grad F: Sending lots of spam. Professor B: So they s so {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Tha - that's what they're paid to do. Grad F: Yep. Professor B: And so, {vocalsound} it is certainly possible that, uh, somebody's server would be down or something and they wouldn't actually hear from us, and then they find this thing is in there and we've already distributed it to someone. So, {vocalsound} what it says in there, in fact, is that they will be given an opportunity to blah - blah - blah, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Professor B: but if in fact {disfmarker} if we sent them something or we thought we sent them something but they didn't actually receive it for some reason, {vocalsound} um, then we haven't given them that. Grad F: Well, so how far do we have to go? Do we need to get someone's signature? Or, is email enough? Professor B: I i i em email is enough. Grad F: Do we have to have it notarized? I mean {disfmarker} OK. Professor B: Yeah. I mean, I've been through this {disfmarker} I mean, I'm not a lawyer, but I've been through these things a f things f like this a few times with lawyers now Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: so I {disfmarker} I {vocalsound} I I'm pretty comfortable with that. PhD C: Do you track, um, when people log in to look at the {disfmarker}? Grad F: Uh. If they submit the form, I get it. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad F: If they don't submit the form, it goes in the general web log. But that's not sufficient. PhD C: Hmm. Grad F: Right? Cuz if someone just visits the web site that doesn't {pause} imply anything in particular. PhD C: Except that you know they got the mail. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. That's right. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} I could get you on the notify list if you want me to. Grad F: I'm already on it. Postdoc A: For that directory? OK, great. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Professor B: So again, hopefully, um, this shouldn't be quite as odious a problem either way, uh, in any of the extremes we've talked about because {vocalsound} uh, we're talking a pretty small {pause} number of people. Grad F: W For this set, I'm not worried, because {pause} we basically know everyone on it. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: You know, they're all more or less here or it's {disfmarker} it's Eric and Dan and so on. But for some of the others, you're talking about visitors who are {pause} gone from ICSI, whose email addresses may or may not work, Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Oh. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Grad F: and {disfmarker} So what are we gonna do when we run into someone that we can't get in touch with? Postdoc A: I don't think, uh {disfmarker} They're so recent, these visitors. Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: I {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I {disfmarker} they're also so {disfmarker} Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: They're prominent enough that they're easy to find through {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I w I'll be able to {disfmarker} if you have any trouble finding them, I really think I could find them. Grad F: Other methods? OK. Professor B: Yeah. Cuz it {disfmarker} what it {disfmarker} what it really does promise here is that we will ask their permission. Um, and I think, you know, if you go into a room and close the door and {disfmarker} and ask their permission {vocalsound} and they're not there, it doesn't seem {comment} that that's the intent of, uh, meaning here. So. Grad F: Well, the qu the question is just whether {disfmarker} how active it has to be. I mean, because they {disfmarker} they filled out a contact information and that's where I'm sending the information. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And so far everyone has done email. There isn't anyone who did, uh, any other contact method. Professor B: Well, the way ICSI goes, people, uh, who, uh, were here ten years ago still have acc {vocalsound} have forwards to other accounts and so on. Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: So it's unusual that {disfmarker} that they, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: So my original impression was that that was sufficient, that if they give us contact information and that contact information isn't accurate that {pause} we fulfilled our burden. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then they just come back. PhD C: All my files were still here. PhD E: Same as us. Postdoc A: I just {disfmarker} Professor B: So if we get to a boundary case like that then maybe I will call the attorney about it. PhD C: Yeah. Grad F: OK. Professor B: But, you know, hopefully we won't need to. Postdoc A: I d I just don't think we will. For all the reasons that we've discussed. Grad F: Alright. Professor B: So we'll {disfmarker} we'll see if we do or not. Grad F: Yep. And we'll see how many people respond to that email. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: So far, two people have. Professor B: Yeah. I think very few people will Grad F: So. Professor B: and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and, you know, people {disfmarker} people see long emails about things that they don't think {vocalsound} is gonna be high priority, they typically, uh, don't {disfmarker} don't read it, or half read it. Grad F: Right. Professor B: Cuz people are swamped. Postdoc A: And actually, Professor B: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: um, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} didn't anticipate this so I {disfmarker} that's why I didn't give this comment, and it {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} this discussion has made me think it might be nice to have a follow - up email within the next couple of days saying" by the way, you know, we wanna hear back from you by X date and please {disfmarker}" , and then add what Liz said {disfmarker}" please, uh, respond to {disfmarker} please indicate you received this mail." Professor B: Uh, or e well, maybe even additionally, uh, um," Even if you've decided you have no changes you'd like to make, if you could tell us that" . Grad F: Respond to the email. {comment} Yep. Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. It is the first time through the cycle. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Right. That would {disfmarker} that would definitely work on me. You know, it makes you feel m like, um, if you were gonna p if you're predicting that you might not answer, you have a chance now to say that. Whereas, I {disfmarker} I mean, I would be much more likely myself, PhD C: And the other th PhD E: given all my email, t to respond at that point, saying" you know what, I'm probably not gonna get to it" or whatever, rather than just having seen the email, thinking I might get to it, and never really, {vocalsound} uh, pushing myself to actually do it until it's too late. PhD C: Yeah. I was {disfmarker} I was thinking that it also {pause} lets them know that they don't have to go to the page to {pause} accept this. PhD E: Right. R Right. That's true. Professor B: Right. PhD C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} Yeah. So that way they could {disfmarker} they can see from that email that if they just write back and say" I got it, no changes" , they're off the hook. Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: They don't have to go to the web page Professor B: I mean, the other thing I've learned from dealing with {disfmarker} dealing with people sending in reviews and so forth, uh, is, um, {vocalsound} if you say" you've got three months to do this review" , {vocalsound} um, people do it, you know, {vocalsound} two and seven eighths months from now. PhD C: and {disfmarker} PhD E: Yeah. That's true. Professor B: If you say" you've got three weeks to do this review" , they do {disfmarker} do it, you know, two and seven eighths weeks from now {disfmarker} {vocalsound} they do the review. Grad F: Right. Professor B: And, um {disfmarker} So, if we make it {pause} a little less time, I don't think it'll be that much {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, and also if we want it ready by the fifteenth, that means we better give them deadline of the first, if we have any prayer of actually getting everyone to respond in time. Professor B: There's the responding part and there's also what if, uh, I mean, I hope this doesn't happen, what if there are a bunch of deletions that have to get put in and changes? Grad F: Right. Professor B: Then {vocalsound} we actually have to deal with that Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Some lead time. Professor B: if we want it to {disfmarker} Grad F: Ugh! Disk space, Postdoc A: By the way, has {disfmarker} has Jeremy signed the form? Grad F: oh my god! I hadn't thought about that. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: That for every meeting {disfmarker} any meeting which has any bleeps in it we need yet another copy of. PhD H: Oh. PhD C: Just that channel. Grad D: Can't you just do that channel? PhD C: Oh, no. We have to do {disfmarker} Grad F: No, of course not. PhD E: Yeah. You have to do all of them, Grad F: You need all the channels. Grad D: Oh. PhD C: Do you have to do the other close - talking? PhD E: as well as all of these. Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: You have to do all {disfmarker} You could just do it in that time period, though, Grad F: Yes. Absolutely. There's a lot of cross - talk. Grad G: Wow. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} PhD E: but I guess it's a pain. Grad F: Well, but you have to copy the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: Right? Because we're gonna be releasing the whole file. PhD E: Yeah. You're right. Postdoc A: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} I {disfmarker} you know, I think at a certain point, that copy that has the deletions will become the master copy. Grad F: Yeah. It's just I hate deleting any data. So I {disfmarker} I don't want {disfmarker} I really would rather make a copy of it, rather than bleep it out Professor B: Are you del are you bleeping it by adding? Grad F: and then {disfmarker} Overlapping. So, it's {disfmarker} it's exactly a censor bleep. So what I really think is" bleep" Professor B: I I I I understand, but is {disfmarker} is it summing signals Grad F: and then I want to {disfmarker} Professor B: or do you {pause} delete the old one and put the new one in? Grad F: I delete the old one, put the new one in. Professor B: Oh, OK. Cuz {disfmarker} Grad F: There's nothing left of the original signal. Professor B: Oh. Cuz if you were summing, you could {disfmarker} No. But anyway {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. It would be qui quite easy to get it back again. Postdoc A: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} And then w I was gonna say also that the they don't have to stay on the system, as you know, Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: Then someday we can sell the {pause} unedited versions. Postdoc A: cuz {disfmarker} cuz the {disfmarker} the ones {disfmarker} Grad F: Say again? Postdoc A: Once it's been successfully bleeped, can't you rely on the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Or {pause} we'll tell people the frequency of the beep Professor B: Encrypt it. PhD C: and then they could subtract the beep out. Grad D: You can hide it. Yeah. Postdoc A: Can't you rely on the archiving to preserve the older version? PhD H: Oh, yeah. Grad D: It wouldn't be that hard to hide it. PhD E: Right. Exactly. I see. Grad F: Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Yep, that's true. PhD E: See, this is good. I wanted to create some {pause} side conversations in these meetings. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. You could encrypt it, you know, with a {disfmarker} with a two hundred bit {disfmarker} {vocalsound} thousand bit, uh {disfmarker} Grad D: You can use spread spectrum. PhD C: Uh - huh. Grad D: Hide it. PhD E: So {disfmarker} PhD C: Here we go. PhD E: Yeah. Yeah. Grad D: Yeah, there you go. PhD E: Cuz we don't have enough asides. PhD H: I have an idea. You reverse the signal, Grad D: There you go. PhD H: so it {disfmarker} it lets people say what they said backwards. Grad F: Backwards. Grad D: Then you have, like, subliminal, uh, messages, Grad F: But, ha you've seen the {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} the speech recognition system that reversed very short segments. PhD H: Yeah. Grad D: like. Grad F: Did you read that paper? It wouldn't work. PhD H: No. Grad F: The speech recognizer still works. PhD E: Yeah. And if you do it backward then {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. PhD C: That's cuz they use forward - backward. PhD E: H - good old HMM. Grad F: Forward but backward. That's right. PhD E: No, it's backward - forward. Grad F: Good point. A point. Well, I'm sorry if I sound a little peeved about this whole thing. It's just we've had meeting after meeting after meeting a on this and it seems like we've never gotten it resolved. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: Well, but we never also {disfmarker} we've also never done it. PhD E: Uh. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: This is the first cycle. PhD E: If it makes {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: There're bound to be some glitches the first time through. Professor B: So. {vocalsound} And, uh {disfmarker} and I'm sorry responding without, uh, having much knowledge, but the thing is, uh, I am, like, one of these people who gets a gazillion mails and {disfmarker} and stuff comes in as Grad F: Well, and that's exactly why I did it the way I did it, which is the default is if you do nothing we're gonna release it. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Because, you know, I have my {pause} stack of emails of to d to be done, that, you know, fifty or sixty long, and the ones at the top I'm never gonna get to. Professor B: Right. Grad F: And, uh {pause} So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} PhD C: Move them to the bottom. Professor B: So {disfmarker} so the only thing we're missing is {disfmarker} is some way to respond to easily to say, uh," OK, go ahead" or something. Grad F: Yeah, right. So, i this is gonna mean {disfmarker} PhD C: Just re - mail them to yourself and then they're at the bottom. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. That's actually definitely a good point. The m email doesn't specify that you can just reply to the email, as op as opposed to going to the form Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. PhD H: In {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it also doesn't give a {disfmarker} a specific {disfmarker} I didn't think of it. PhD E: Right. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: S I think it's a good idea {disfmarker} an ex explicit time by which this will be considered definite. Grad F: Yeah, release. Postdoc A: And {disfmarker} and it has to be a time earlier than that endpoint. Professor B: Yeah. It's converging. Postdoc A: Yeah. That's right. PhD H: This {disfmarker} um, I've seen this recently. Uh, I got email, and it {disfmarker} i if I use a MIME - capable mail reader, it actually says, you know, click on this button to confirm receipt {pause} of the {disfmarker} of the mail. Postdoc A: Oh, that's interesting. Grad D: Hmm. PhD H: So {disfmarker} Grad F: You {disfmarker} you can {disfmarker} Grad D: It's like certified mail. Grad F: A lot of mailers support return receipt. Postdoc A: Could do that. PhD H: Right. Grad F: But it doesn't confirm that they've read it. PhD H: No, no, no. This is different. This is not {disfmarker} So, I {disfmarker} I know, you can tell, you know, the, uh, mail delivery agent to {disfmarker} to confirm that the mail was delivered to your mailbox. Postdoc A: Mmm. Grad F: Right. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but, no. This was different. Ins - in the mail, there was a {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, just a button. PhD H: uh, th there was a button that when you clicked on it, it would send, uh, you know, a actual acknowledgement to the sender that you had actually looked at the mail. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Yeah. Unfor - Yeah, we could do that. But I hate that. PhD H: But it o but it only works for, you know, MIME - capable {disfmarker} you know, if you use Netscape or something like that for your n Grad F: Yeah. Professor B: And {disfmarker} PhD E: You might as well just respond to the mail. Professor B: And we actually need a third thing. PhD E: I mean PhD H: Right. Professor B: It's not that you've looked at it, it's that you've looked at it and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and agree with one of the possible actions. PhD H: No, no. You can do that. Professor B: Right? PhD H: You know, you can put this button anywhere you want, Professor B: Oh? Oh, I see. PhD H: and you can put it the bottom of the message and say" here, by {disfmarker} you know, by clicking on this, I {disfmarker} I agree {disfmarker} {vocalsound} uh, you know, I acknowledge {disfmarker}" Professor B: That i i my first - born children are yours, and {disfmarker} Yeah. Yeah. PhD E: Quick question. Are, um {disfmarker} Grad F: Well, I could put a URL in there without any difficulty and {pause} even pretty simple MIME readers can do that. So. Postdoc A: But why shouldn't they just {pause} email back? I don't see there's a problem. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. Reply. PhD H: Right. Postdoc A: It's very nice. I {disfmarker} I like the high - tech aspect of it, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: but I think {disfmarker} PhD H: No, no, no. {vocalsound} I actually don't. Postdoc A: I appreciate it. PhD H: I'm just saying that Grad F: Well, I {disfmarker} cuz I use a text mail reader. PhD H: if ev but I'm {disfmarker} PhD E: Don't you use VI for your mai? PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. That's {disfmarker} that's my guy. Alright. Grad F: You {disfmarker} you read email {pause} in VI? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Yeah. {vocalsound} I like VI. PhD H: So {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} i There's these logos {pause} that you can put at the bottom of your web page, like" powered by VI" . Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Wow. Grad D: I see. PhD E: Anyway, quick question. Grad F: You could put wed bugs in the email. PhD E: How m PhD H: Yeah. PhD E: Like, there were three meetings this time, or so Postdoc A: Six. PhD E: or how many? Six? But, no of different people. So I guess if you're in both these types of meetings, you'd have a lot. But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} How {disfmarker} I mean, it also depends on how many {disfmarker} Like, if we release {disfmarker} this time it's a fairly small number of meetings, but what if we release, like, twenty - five meetings to people? In th Grad F: Well, what my s expectation is, is that we'll send out one of these emails {pause} every time a meeting has been checked and is ready. PhD E: I don't know. Oh. Oh, OK. So this time was just the first chunk. OK. Grad F: So. Tha - that was my intention. It's just {disfmarker} yeah {disfmarker} that we just happened to have a bunch all at once. PhD E: Well, that's a good idea. Grad F: I mean, maybe {disfmarker} Is that {pause} the way it's gonna be, you think, Jane? Postdoc A: I agree with you. It's {disfmarker} we could do it, uh {disfmarker} I I could {disfmarker} I'd be happy with either way, batch - wise {disfmarker} What I was thinking {disfmarker} Uh, so this one {disfmarker} That was exactly right, that we had a {disfmarker} uh, uh {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I had wanted to get the entire set of twelve hours ready. Don't have it. But, uh, this was the biggest clump I could do by a time where I thought it was reasonable. Professor B: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: People would be able to check it and still have it ready by then. My, um {disfmarker} I was thinking that with the {pause} NSA meetings, I'd like {disfmarker} there are three of them, and they're {disfmarker} uh, I {disfmarker} I will have them done by Monday. Uh, unfortunately the time is later and I don't know how that's gonna work out, but I thought it'd be good to have that released as a clump, too, because then, {vocalsound} you know, they're {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they have a {disfmarker} it it's in a category, it's not quite so distracting to them, is what I was thinking, and it's all in one chu But after that, when we're caught up a bit on this process, then, um, I could imagine sending them out periodically as they become available. PhD E: OK. Postdoc A: I could do it either way. I mean, it's a question of how distracting it is to the people who have to do the checking. Professor B: We heard anything from IBM? at all? PhD C: Uh. Let's see. We {disfmarker} Yeah, right. So we got the transcript back from that one meeting. Everything seemed fine. Adam {pause} had a script that will {pause} put everything back together and there was {disfmarker} Well, there was one small problem but it was a simple thing to fix. And then, um, {vocalsound} we, uh {disfmarker} I sent him a pointer to three more. And so he's {pause} off and {pause} working on those. Grad F: Yeah. Now we haven't actually had anyone go through that meeting, to see whether the transcript is correct and to see how much was missed and all that sort of stuff. Postdoc A: That's on my list. Grad F: So at some point we need to do that. PhD C: Yeah. Postdoc A: Well, that's on my list. PhD C: Yeah. It's gonna have to go through our regular process. Grad F: I mean, the one thing I noticed is it did miss a lot of backchannels. There are a fair number of" yeahs" and" uh - huhs" that {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} that aren't in there. So. Postdoc A: Hmm. Professor B: But I think {disfmarker} Yeah. Like you said, I mean, that's {disfmarker} that's gonna be our standard proc that's what the transcribers are gonna be spending most of their time doing, I would imagine, Postdoc A: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm, mm - hmm. Professor B: once {disfmarker} once we {disfmarker} Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Postdoc A: One question about the backchannels. Professor B: It's gonna {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Do you suppose that was because they weren't caught by the pre - segmenter? Grad F: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. Postdoc A: Oh, interesting. Oh, interesting. OK. Grad F: Yeah. They're {disfmarker} they're not in the segmented. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: It's not that the {pause} IBM people didn't do it. Postdoc A: OK. Grad F: Just they didn't get marked. Postdoc A: OK. So maybe when the detector for that gets better or something {disfmarker} I w I {disfmarker} There's another issue which is this {disfmarker} we've been, uh, contacted by University of Washington now, of course, to, um {disfmarker} We sent them the transcripts that correspond to those {pause} six meetings and they're downloading the audio files. So they'll be doing that. Chuck's {disfmarker} Chuck's, uh, put that in. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Yeah, I pointed them to the set that Andreas put, uh, on the {vocalsound} web so th if they want to compare directly with his results they can. And, um, then once, uh, th we can also point them at the, um, uh, the original meetings and they can grab those, too, with SCP. PhD E: Wait. So you put the reference files {disfmarker}? PhD C: No, no. They d they wanted the audio. PhD E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD C: Jane sent them the, uh, transcripts. PhD E: No, I mean of the transcripts. Um. Well, we can talk about it off - line. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Grad F: There's another meeting in here, what, at four? Right? Yeah, so we have to finish by three forty - five. PhD H: D d So, does Washi - does {disfmarker} does UW wanna u do this {disfmarker} wanna use this data for recognition or for something else? PhD C: Uh, for recognition. PhD E: I think they're doing w PhD H: Oh. PhD E: didn't they want to do language modeling on, you know, recognition - compatible transcripts PhD H: Oh. I see. Postdoc A: This is to show you, uh, some of the things that turn up during the checking procedure. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: or {disfmarker}? Postdoc A: Um @ @ {comment} So, this is from one of the NSA meetings and, uh, i if you're familiar with the diff format, the arrow to the left is what it was, and the arrow to the right is {pause} what it was changed to. So, um. {vocalsound} And now the first one." OK. So, then we started a weekly meeting. The last time, uh {disfmarker}" And the transcriber thought" little too much" But, {vocalsound} uh, really, um, it was" we learned too much" , which makes more sense syntactically as well. PhD H: And these {disfmarker} the parentheses were f from {disfmarker} Postdoc A: Then {disfmarker} Oh, this {disfmarker} that's the convention for indicating uncertain. Grad F: U uncertains. Postdoc A: So the transcriber was right. PhD H: S Postdoc A: You know, she was uncertain about that. PhD H: OK. Postdoc A: So she's right to be uncertain. And it's also a g a good indication of the {disfmarker} of that. PhD H: Oh. {comment} OK. Postdoc A: The next one. This was about, uh, Claudia and {pause} she'd been really b busy with stuff, such as waivers. Uh, OK. Um, next one. Um. {vocalsound} This was {pause} an interesting one. So the original was" So that's not {disfmarker} so Claudia's not the bad master here" , and then he laughs, but it really" web master" . Grad F: Web master. Grad D: Oh. {comment} Uh - oh. Postdoc A: And then you see another type of uncertainty which is, you know, they just didn't know what to make out of that. So instead of" split upon unknown" , {comment} it's" split in principle" . Grad F: Yep. Grad D: Jane, these are from IBM? Grad F: Spit upon? Grad D: The top lines? Postdoc A: No, no. These are {disfmarker} these are our local transcriptions of the NSA meetings. Grad F: No, these are {pause} ours. Postdoc A: The transcribers {disfmarker} transcriber's version ver versus the checked version. Grad D: Oh. Oh, I see. Postdoc A: My {disfmarker} my checked version, after I go through it. Grad D: OK. Postdoc A: Um, then you get down here. Um. Sometimes some speakers will insert foreign language terms. That's the next example, the next one. The, uh, version beyond this is {disfmarker} So instead of saying" or" , especially those words," also" and" oder" and some other ones. Those sneak in. Um, the next one {disfmarker} Grad F: That's cool. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: S PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: Sorry, what? Discourse markers? Sure. Sure, sure, sure. PhD H: Discourse markers. Postdoc A: And it's {disfmarker} and it makes sense PhD H: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz it's, like, below this {disfmarker} it's a little subliminal there. PhD H: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Postdoc A: Um. OK, the next one, uh, {vocalsound} this is a term. The problem with terminology. Description with th the transcriber has" X as an advance" . But really it's" QS in advance" . I mean, I {disfmarker} I've benefited from some of these, uh, cross - group meetings. OK, then you got, um, {vocalsound} uh, instead of" from something - or - other cards" , {comment} it's" for multicast" . And instead of" ANN system related" , it's" end system related" . This was changed to an acronym initially and it should shouldn't have been. And then, you can see here" GPS" was misinterpreted. It's just totally understanda This is {disfmarker} this is a lot of jargon. Um, and the final one, the transcriber had th" in the core network itself or the exit unknown, not the internet unknown" . And it {disfmarker} it comes through as" in the core network itself of the access provider, not the internet backbone core" . Now this is a lot of {pause} terminology. And they're generally extremely good, PhD H: Mmm. Postdoc A: but, you know in this {disfmarker} this area it really does pay to, um {disfmarker} to double check and I'm hoping that when the checked versions are run through the recognizer that you'll see s substantial improvements in performance cuz the {disfmarker} you know, there're a lot of these in there. PhD H: Yeah. So how often {disfmarker}? Grad F: Yeah, but I bet {disfmarker} I bet they're acoustically challenging parts anyway, though. Postdoc A: No, actually no. Grad D: Mmm. Postdoc A: Huh - uh. Grad F: Oh, really? Uh, it's {disfmarker} Oh, so it's just jargon. Postdoc A: It's jargon. Yeah. I mean this is {disfmarker} cuz, you know you don't realize in daily life how much you have top - down influences in what you're hearing. PhD H: Well, but {disfmarker} Postdoc A: And it's jar it's jargon coupled with a foreign accent. PhD H: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} But we don't {disfmarker} I mean, our language model right now doesn't know about these words anyhow. So, Professor B: Yeah. PhD H: you know, un until you actually {pause} get a decent language model, @ @ {comment} Adam's right. Grad F: It probably won't do any better. PhD H: You probably won't notice a difference. But it's {disfmarker} I mean, it's definitely good that these are fixed. I mean, {vocalsound} obviously. Postdoc A: Well, also from the standpoint of getting people's approval, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: cuz if someone sees a page full of uh, um, barely decipherable w you know, sentences, and then is asked to approve of it or not, {vocalsound} it's, uh, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Did I say that? Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: Yeah. That would be a shame if people said" well, I don't approve it because {pause} the {disfmarker} it's not what I said" . Grad F: Well, that's exactly why I put the extra option in, Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: Exactly. That's why we discussed that. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: is that I was afraid people would say," let's censor that because it's wrong" , Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: and I don't want them to do that. Postdoc A: And then I also {disfmarker} the final thing I have for transcription is that I made a purchase of some other headphones PhD H: C Postdoc A: because of the problem of low gain in the originals. And {disfmarker} and they very much appro they mu much prefer the new ones, and actually I {disfmarker} I mean, I {disfmarker} I think that there will be fewer things to correct because of the {disfmarker} the choice. We'd originally chosen, uh, very expensive head headsets Grad F: Yeah. Ugh! Postdoc A: but, um, they're just not as good as these, um, in this {disfmarker} with this respect to this particular task. PhD H: Well, return the old ones. Grad F: It's probably impedance matching problems. Postdoc A: I don't know exactly, Grad F: But {disfmarker} Postdoc A: but we chose them because that's what's been used here by prominent projects in transcription. Professor B: Could be. Postdoc A: So it i we had every reason to think they would work. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD H: So you have spare headsets? Postdoc A: Sorry, what? PhD H: You have spare headsets? Grad F: They're just earphones. They're not headsets. They're not microphones. PhD E: Right. PhD H: No, no. I mean, just earphones? Um, because I, uh, I could use one on my workstation, just to t because sometimes I have to listen to audio files and I don't have to b go borrow it from someone and {disfmarker} Postdoc A: We have actua actually I have {disfmarker} W Well, the thing is, that if we have four people come to work {pause} for a day, I was {disfmarker} I was hanging on to the others for, eh {disfmarker} for spares, PhD H: Oh, OK. Postdoc A: but I can tell you what I recommend. Professor B: No, but you'd {disfmarker} If you {disfmarker} Yeah, w we should get it. PhD H: Sure. No problem. Grad F: But if you need it, just get it. PhD H: I just {disfmarker} Grad F: Come on. PhD H: Right. Professor B: Yeah. If you need it. PhD H: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Postdoc A: It'd just have to be a s a separate order {disfmarker} an added order. Grad D: Yeah, I still {disfmarker} I still need to get a pair, too. Professor B: They're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're {disfmarker} they're pretty inexpensive. PhD E: Yeah, that {disfmarker} We should order a cou uh, t two or three or four, actually. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: I'm using one of these. Yeah. PhD E: We have {disfmarker} PhD H: I think I have a pair that I brought from home, but it's f just for music listening Professor B: No. Just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just {disfmarker} just buy them. PhD E: Sh - Just get the model number PhD H: and it's not {disfmarker} Nnn. Yeah. Professor B: Just buy them. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Where do you buy these from? PhD H: Yeah. Postdoc A: Cambridge SoundWorks, just down the street. PhD E: Like {disfmarker}? You just b go and b Postdoc A: Yeah. They always have them in stock. PhD E: Oh. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: That'd be a good idea. PhD H: Anyway. Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: W uh, could you email out the brand? Postdoc A: Oh, sure. Yeah. OK. Grad F: Cuz I think {disfmarker} sounds like people are interested. Grad D: Yeah. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Definitely. Grad F: So. Postdoc A: It's made a difference in {disfmarker} in how easy. Yeah. Professor B: I realized something I should talk about. So what's the other thing on the agenda actually? Grad F: Uh, the only one was Don wanted to, uh, talk about disk space yet again. Grad D: Yeah. u It's short. I mean, if you wanna go, we can just throw it in at the end. Professor B: No, no. Why don't you {disfmarker} why don't you go ahead since it's short. Grad D: Um, well, uh. Grad F: Oh, I thought you meant the disk space. Yeah, we know disk space is short. PhD H: The disk space was short. Yeah. That's what I thought too. PhD E: That's a great ambiguity. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: It's one of these {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's social Professor B: It's {disfmarker} I i i it i PhD E: and, uh, discourse level Grad D: Yeah. PhD E: and {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, it's great. Yeah, PhD E: Sorry. Professor B: double {disfmarker} double {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah, it was really goo PhD E: See, if I had that little {pause} scratch - pad, I would have made an X there. Grad D: Thank you, thank you. Grad F: Uh, well, we'll give you one then. Professor B: Yeah. Grad D: Um. {vocalsound} So, um, without thinking about it, when I offered up my hard drive last week {disfmarker} Grad F: Oh, no. Grad D: Um, this is always a suspect phrase. PhD E: It was while I was out of town. Grad D: But, um, no. I, uh {disfmarker} I realized that we're going to be doing a lot of experiments, um, {vocalsound} o for this, uh, paper we're writing, so we're probably gonna need a lot more {disfmarker} We're probably gonna need {vocalsound} that disk space that we had on that eighteen gig hard drive. But, um, we also have someone else coming in that's gonna help us out with some stuff. Professor B: We've just ordered a hundred gigabytes. Grad D: So {disfmarker} OK. We just need to {disfmarker} PhD E: I think we need, like, another eighteen gig disk {pause} to be safe. Professor B: Well, we're getting three thirty {disfmarker} thirty - sixes. PhD E: So. Professor B: Right? Grad D: OK. Professor B: That are going into the main f file server. PhD E: OK. Professor B: So. PhD C: Markham's ordering and they should be coming in soon. Grad D: W Well. So {disfmarker} so {disfmarker} Grad F: Soon? Grad D: Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing is is, all I need is to hang it off, like, {vocalsound} the person who's coming in, Sonali's, computer. PhD H: Oh, so {disfmarker} so, you mean the d the internal {disfmarker} the disks on the machines that we just got? Grad D: Whew. Or we can move them. Grad F: No. PhD C: These are gonna go onto Abbott. Grad F: Ne - new disks. PhD H: Or extra disk? Professor B: Onto Abbott, the file server. Grad D: So are we gonna move the stuff off of my hard drive onto that when those come in? Grad F: On {disfmarker} PhD H: Oh, oh. OK. Grad F: Yeah. PhD E: Uh, i Grad F: Once they come in. Sure. Grad D: OK. That's fine. PhD E: Do {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when is this planned for {pause} roughly? PhD C: They should be {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I imagine next week or something. Grad D: OK. PhD E: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad F: If you're {disfmarker} if you're desperate, I have some space on my drive. Grad D: I think if I'm {disfmarker} Grad F: But I {disfmarker} I vacillate between no space free and {pause} a few gig free. Grad D: Yeah. I think I can find something if I'm desperate PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. Grad D: and, um, in the meantime I'll just hold out. Grad F: OK. Grad D: That was the only thing I wanted to bring up. PhD C: It should be soon. We {disfmarker} we should {disfmarker} Grad D: OK. Professor B: So there's another hundred gig. So. Grad D: Alright. Great. PhD H: Mm - hmm. Professor B: OK. It's great to be able to do it, Grad D: That's it. Professor B: just say" oh yeah, a hundred gig, PhD E: Good. Professor B: no big deal" . Grad D: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah. A hundred gig here, a hundred gig there. PhD E: Well, each meeting is like a gig or something, Grad F: It's eventually real disk space. Professor B: Yeah. PhD E: so it's really {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Um. Yeah. I was just going to comment that I I'm going to, uh, be on the phone with Mari tomorrow, late afternoon. Grad F: Oh, yeah. Professor B: We're supposed to {vocalsound} get together and talk about, uh, where we are on things. Uh, there's this meeting coming up, uh, and there's also an annual report. Now, I never actually {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was asking about this. I don't really quite understand this. She was re she was referring to it as {disfmarker} I think this actually {pause} didn't just come from her, but this is {pause} what, uh, DARPA had asked for. Um, she's referring to it as the an annual report for the fiscal year. But of course the fiscal year starts in October, so I don't quite understand w w why we do an annual report that we're writing in July. PhD C: She's either really late or really early. Grad F: Huh. Or she's getting a good early start. Professor B: Uh, I think basically it it's none of those. It's that the meeting is in July so they {disfmarker} so DARPA just said do an annual report. So. So. So anyway, I'll be putting together stuff. I'll do it, uh, you know, as much as I can without bothering people, just by looking at {disfmarker} at papers and status reports. I mean, the status reports you do are very helpful. PhD H: Hmm. Professor B: Uh, so I can grab stuff there. And if, uh {disfmarker} if I have some questions I'll {disfmarker} Grad F: When we remember to fill them out. Professor B: Yeah. If {pause} people could do it as soon as {disfmarker} as you can, if you haven't done one si recently. Uh. {vocalsound} Uh, but, you know, I'm {disfmarker} I'm sure before {pause} it's all done, I'll end up bugging people for {disfmarker} for more clarification about stuff. Um. {vocalsound} But, um, I don't know, I guess {disfmarker} I guess I know pretty much what people have been doing. We have these meetings and {disfmarker} and there's the status reports. Uh. But, um. Um. Yeah. So that wasn't a long one. Just to tell you that. And if something {vocalsound} hasn't, uh {disfmarker} I'll be talking to her late tomorrow afternoon, and if something hasn't been in a status report and you think it's important thing to mention on {vocalsound} this kind of thing, uh, uh, just pop me a one - liner and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and I'll {disfmarker} I'll have it in front of me for the phone conversation. PhD H: OK. Professor B: Uh. I guess, uh, you you're still pecking away at the {pause} demos and all that, probably. Grad F: Yep. And Don is {pause} gonna be helping out with that. Professor B: Oh, that's right. Grad F: So. Professor B: OK. Grad F: Did you wanna talk about that this afternoon? Grad D: Um. Grad F: Not here, but later today? Grad D: We should probably talk off - line about when we're gonna talk off - line. Grad F: OK. OK. Professor B: OK. Yeah, I might want to get updated about it in about a week cuz, um, I'm actually gonna have a {disfmarker} {vocalsound} a few days off the following week, a after the {disfmarker} after the picnic. So. Grad F: Oh, OK. Professor B: That's all I had. Grad F: So we were gonna do sort of status of speech transcription {disfmarker} automatic transcription, but we're kind of running late. So. PhD E: How long does it take you to save the data? Grad F: Fifteen minutes. PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: So. If you wanna do a quick PhD E: Yeah. Grad F: ten minute {disfmarker} PhD E: Guess we should stop, like, twenty of at the latest. Professor B: Uh {disfmarker} PhD E: We {disfmarker} we have another meeting coming in that they wanna record. Professor B: And there's the digits to do. PhD E: So. Professor B: So maybe {disfmarker} may maybe {disfmarker} maybe {disfmarker} Grad F: Yeah. Well, we can skip the digits. Professor B: We could. Fi - five minute report or something. PhD E: It's up to you. I don't {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah, yeah. Grad F: Whatever you want. Professor B: Well, I would love to hear about it, Grad F: What do you have to say? Professor B: especially since {disfmarker} Grad F: I'm interested, so {disfmarker} Professor B: Yeah. Well, I'm gonna be on the phone tomorrow, so this is just a {pause} good example of {pause} the sort of thing I'd like to {pause} hear about. PhD E: Wait. Why is everybody looking at me? PhD C: I don't know. Grad F: Sorry. Professor B: Cuz he looked at you PhD H: What? Professor B: and says you're sketching. PhD E: Uh. I'm not sure what you were referring to. PhD H: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I'm not {disfmarker} actually, I'm not sure what {disfmarker}? Are we supposed to have done something? Grad F: No. We were just talking before about alternating the subject of the meeting. PhD H: Oh. PhD E: Uh - huh. Grad F: And this week we were gonna try to do {pause} t automatic transcription {pause} status. PhD H: Alternating. PhD E: I wasn't here last week. Sorry. PhD H: Oh! PhD E: Oh. Grad F: But we sort of failed. PhD H: We did that last week. Right? PhD E: Hhh. Grad F: No. Professor B: I thought we did. Grad F: Did we? OK. PhD H: Yeah. We did. Grad F: OK. So now {disfmarker} now we have the schedule. So next week we'll do automatic transcription status, plus anything that's real timely. PhD H: OK. PhD E: Oh. OK. Postdoc A: OK. Professor B: OK. Whew! PhD C: Good update. Grad F: Whew! Professor B: That was {disfmarker} Grad F: Dodged that bullet. Professor B: Yeah. Nicely done, Liz. Postdoc A: A woman of few words. Professor B: But {disfmarker} but lots of prosody. OK. {vocalsound} OK. Grad F: Th PhD H: Uh, I mean, we {disfmarker} we really haven't done anything. Grad F: Excuse me? PhD H: Sorry. Postdoc A: Well, since last week. PhD E: Yeah, we're {disfmarker} PhD H: I mean, the {disfmarker} the next thing on our agenda is to go back and look at the, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} the automatic alignments because, uh, I got some {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I learned from Thilo what data we can use as a benchmark to see how well we're doing on automatic alignments of the background speech {disfmarker} or, of the foreground speech with background speech. Grad F: Yeah. PhD H: So. PhD E: And then, uh, I guess, the new data that Don will start to process {disfmarker} PhD H: But, we haven't actually {disfmarker} PhD E: the, um {disfmarker} when he can get these {disfmarker} You know, before we were working with these segments that were all synchronous and that caused a lot of problems PhD H: Mmm. PhD E: because you have timed sp at {disfmarker} on either side. Grad F: Oh. Right, right. Mm - hmm. PhD E: And so that's sort of a stage - two of trying the same kinds of alignments with the tighter boundaries with them is really the next step. Grad F: Right. Postdoc A: I'll be interested. PhD E: We did get our, um {disfmarker} I guess, good news. We got our abstract accepted for this conference, um {disfmarker} workshop, ISCA workshop, in, um, uh, New Jersey. And we sent in a very poor abstract, but they {disfmarker} very poor, very quick. Um, but we're hoping to have a paper for that as well, which should be an interesting {disfmarker} Grad F: When's it due? PhD E: The t paper isn't due until August. The abstracts were already due. So it's that kind of workshop. Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD E: But, I mean, the good news is that that will have sort of the European experts in prosody {disfmarker} sort of a different crowd, and I think we're the only people working on prosody in meetings so far, so that should be interesting. Postdoc A: What's the name of the meeting? PhD E: Uh, it's ISCA Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, or something like that {disfmarker} PhD H: It's called Prosody to {disfmarker} Grad F: Mm - hmm. Postdoc A: Good. PhD E: some generic {disfmarker} Uh, so it's focused on using prosody in automatic systems and there's a {disfmarker} um, a web page for it. Professor B: Y you going to, uh, Eurospeech? Yeah. Grad F: I don't have a paper PhD H: Yeah. Grad F: but I'd kinda like to go, if I could. Is that alright? Professor B: We'll discuss it. Grad F: OK. {vocalsound} I guess that's" no" . Professor B: My {disfmarker} my {disfmarker} my car {disfmarker} my car needs a good wash, by the way. Grad F: OK. Well, that th Hey, if that's what it takes, that's fine with me. Professor B: Um. Grad F: I'll pick up your dry - cleaning, too. Should we do digits? Professor B: Yeah. Grad F: Uh. PhD H: Can I go next? Because I have to leave, actually. Grad F: Yep. Go for it. Hmm! Thanks. Thank you. Professor B: So you get to be the one who has all the paper rustling. Right?

The meeting was mostly about the logistics of covering the legal bases around releasing meeting data. The team wanted to make sure that meeting participants would not sue for libel or releasing unwanted information. The team also went over the transcriptions that IBM had done as well as storage space, which was finally looking up. The meeting ended with a general discussion about the progress of the group and future directions.

tr-sq-35

tr-sq-35_0

Summarize the discussion about changes in the current design. Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

User Interface indicated to have a simple LCD screen to cut down the budget, while Industrial Designer suggested the application of a little more complex LCD panel, like the number pad, could display the advanced functions possibly used by the users. Marketing and Project Manager agreed with Industrial Designer. Next, the group turned to discuss some details, like the total size for the button, and the various functions of the button as well as a jog-dial.

tr-sq-36

tr-sq-36_0

What was the discussion about the button when talking about changes in the current design? Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

The button was red with a width of three centimeters and a half. As for the function, it could be used as a confirm button for the LCD screen and a power button if the user held it for around two seconds.

tr-sq-37

tr-sq-37_0

What was the discussion about the jog dial's function when talking about changes in the current design? Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

The jog dial can be used to control volume, contrast, brightness, channels, auxiliary inputs, color, sharpness, sound, audio, left-right balance, and pre-programmed sound modes.

tr-sq-38

tr-sq-38_0

Summarize the discussion about evaluating the project. Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

Project Manager wanted the members to evaluate the whole process of the project, such as the system, leadership, teamwork, and tools given. The meeting system was considered creative yet inefficient as the early designs were found generally out of budget. As for leadership, the process was a bit too structured. As for teamwork, additional communications like the quick talk could further prompt the current system. Besides, the tools given were criticized for the isolation of each's tasks and thoughts.

tr-sq-39

tr-sq-39_0

What did Marketing think about Project Manager's system when evaluating the project? Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

Marketing thought Project Manager's system was fairly institutional with a central point of creativity, but the group ought to focus more on the stylish look and technology and make a proper consideration on the budget.

tr-sq-40

tr-sq-40_0

What did Industrial Designer think of the project? Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

Industrial Designer thought the meeting was not friendly to the brainstorming. The restriction was not about the atmosphere but related to the actual environment and the limited time for discussion. Besides, the interaction was structured, meaning each individual took charge of one particular task without enough collaboration between each other. Also, communication through email was inefficient.

tr-gq-41

tr-gq-41_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: Okay we all all set? Right. Well this is the uh final detailed design meeting. Um we're gonna discuss the look and feel design, the user interface design, and we're gonna evaluate the product. And the end result of this meeting has to be a decision on the details of this remote control, like absolute final decision, um and then I'm gonna have to specify the final design in the final report. So um just from from last time to recap, we said we were gonna have a snowman shaped remote control with no L_C_D_ display, no need for talk-back, it was hopefully gonna be kinetic power and battery uh with rubber buttons, maybe backlighting the buttons with some internal L_E_D_s to shine through the casing, um hopefully a jog-dial, and incorporating the slogan somewhere as well. Anything I've missed? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: Okay um so uh if you want to present your prototype go ahead. User Interface: Uh-oh. This is it? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer, made in Japan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um, there are a few changes we've made. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, well look at the expense sheet, and uh it turned to be quite a lot expensive to have open up and have lots of buttons and stuff inside, Project Manager: Mm. Mm-hmm. User Interface: so instead we've um {disfmarker} this is gonna be an L_C_D_ screen, um just a a very very basic one, very small um with access to the menu through the the scroll wheel and uh confirm um button. Marketing: Mm'kay. User Interface: Uh, apart from that, it's just pretty much the same as we discussed last time. Industrial Designer: And there isn't uh d it doesn't open up to the advanced functions? the advanced functions are still hidden from you, but they're hidden in the sense that um they're not in use. Marketing: Where are they? Industrial Designer: Um they're in the L_C_D_ panel and the jog-dial? Marketing: Ah, right. Industrial Designer: Okay'cause {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w what kind of thing uh is gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: The L_C_D_ panel just displays um functionally what you're doing. If you're using an advanced function right, like um c brightness, contrast, whatever, it will just say {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Okay. Industrial Designer: You know it's like it only has four columns, it's a very simple L_C_D_ like, whereas many {disfmarker} the minimum amount we need that the user will automatically know like this is brightness or this is contrast. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay cool. Marketing: Right,'kay. Industrial Designer: It might even be one, a bit more complex L_C_D_ panel with pictures like maybe the sun or the, you know, the the symbols of the various functions. Marketing: Okay Project Manager: Oh right okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm, and what is this here? Project Manager: Cool. Industrial Designer: That's a number pad. Marketing: Okay so the number pad is {disfmarker}'Kay, great. Project Manager: Where are we gonna have the slogan? Industrial Designer: Um they're al along this {disfmarker} User Interface: You know, just like right inside there. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay cool. Industrial Designer: You have this space here, and then you have this thing on the side as well, or at the bottom. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer:'Cause slogans are usually quite small, right, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: they're not like huge Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: so they're s Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Say a button's about Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Looks good. Industrial Designer: say a button's about this size, right, so you would still have plenty of space for a slogan, say even for that. Marketing: Yep. {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if this isn't to scale, what kind of dimensions are you thinking about here? User Interface: {vocalsound} Well {vocalsound} we want the other buttons to be big enough to push easily with a finger Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so we reckon maybe that'll be about the same size as the palm of your hand. {gap} Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep so that would be about a centimetre for a button, so one two three four centimetres. Plus maybe half o five Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: six seven eight, Marketing: About nine in total. Project Manager: Six, seven, eight, nine, ten. Industrial Designer: about yeah nine total. Project Manager: So we're talking about ten centimetres. Marketing: That sounds good. Yeah. Project Manager: That would be good. So ten centimetres in height. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: Nine, ten. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um {vocalsound}. Marketing: That'd be good, in fact a pen is about ten centimetres usually, so that would be {disfmarker} that sounds like a really good size, if you see it there. Project Manager: Yeah. That's great and it's very bright as well. So um okay. Marketing: Mm. Is it possible {disfmarker} uh I'm just gonna bring up the idea of colours. Is these are these the colours that {disfmarker} of production, or is this just what we had available? User Interface: Well I'm {disfmarker} We're gonna have again the the sort of the foggy um yellow from last time that lit up when you pushed the button. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay so just {disfmarker} User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you just list all the things that it does s so I can write them in the report. User Interface: But um {vocalsound} this button um, because it's red it's sort of very prominent, we're gonna use it as uh {disfmarker} it can be the power button if you hold it for maybe two seconds it'll send a stand-by signal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um apart from that it's gonna be used as a confirm button for the L_C_D_ screen Industrial Designer: Sure. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and you use this as a jog-dial. Project Manager: Okay so that's like an okay button, right. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh we've discussed how h high it is, but how wide is it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: How high is it? Industrial Designer: No as in the height, but what about the width? Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh oh User Interface: Didn't put five centimetres. Project Manager: like depth of the actual thing. Industrial Designer: Do we need five? I don't think five is {disfmarker} User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: be about th three and a half. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Oh is this k to get an idea of scale from your from your thing there okay. User Interface: Something by there. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah. Marketing: Sure. Project Manager: So you can power on and off, what else can you do? Marketing: Three and a half. User Interface: Um you can skip straight to a channel using these buttons. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Um, were gonna have the volume control here, but um because we've got the the L_C_D_ and the jog-dial we just thought we'd um use that as the volume. Project Manager: Okay jog-dial for volume. And what else do you do with the jog-dial? Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Um you can use it for um more advanced functions like contrast, colour and {disfmarker} Project Manager: Contrast, brightness, User Interface: Um yeah. Project Manager: yeah, and anything else? User Interface: Um just whatever else we wanted to include as the advanced functions, um we didn't actually go through and specify the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well of the designers what are they? User Interface: Uh what can a T_V_ do? Industrial Designer: Okay things like um brightness, contrast, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: um maybe tuning the channels. Project Manager: Okay channel tuning. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: That's a good one. Industrial Designer: What else? Um the various inputs. Are you having a V_C_R_, are you having {disfmarker} you know which input do you have? Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay auxiliary inputs. Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: probably colour or sharpness. Industrial Designer: Yep, colour, sharpness. Um a lot of these things will have to be um free and open for users to define them. Project Manager: Sharpness. Okay what about uh sound settings Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: ? Uh d can you change any of those at all? Marketing: Audio. Industrial Designer: Audio, we have like your basic y your base, your mid-range, your high range. User Interface: Um. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: {gap} the the balance hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep, left-right balance, um maybe even pre-programmed sound modes, like um the user could determine like a series of sound modes, Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: and then what could happen would be um when you click on that then it would go to that setting. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: is there anything else at all it can do? That {disfmarker}'cause that's that's fine. Just need to know so I can write it down. Okay um right I g I guess that's it, so we can now um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} We can now have a little look at the the Excel sheet and price listing, and see if we need to um if we need to rethink anything at all. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So um for this first part here power-wise, have we got battery? Industrial Designer: The battery. Project Manager: Do we have kinetic as well? Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: No. Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: just battery. Industrial Designer: We need an {disfmarker} Project Manager: And that's because of cost restraints is it? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah advanced chip. Project Manager: um what about the electronics here? Industrial Designer: We need an advanced chip I think, yep. Project Manager: Advanced chip. Industrial Designer: Let me just confirm that. Yes I think so. Yep. Project Manager: Okay um the case, what does it mean by single and double, do you know? User Interface: Um I think single would just be sort of one sort of oval whereas double is this sort of thing. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So we want double-curved? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. Um. Industrial Designer: Plastic. Project Manager: Is there any rubber at all in the buttons or any Industrial Designer: I think we're gonna have to skip the rubber. Project Manager: Okay, Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: um and we wanted special colours didn't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: So I'll have to put that {disfmarker} Oh no wait we {disfmarker} ho how many colours have we got there? Industrial Designer: For the case itself, one colour. It's one special colour. Project Manager: Just one colour, okay. Industrial Designer:'Cause the case unit itself, the rest of our components go on top of it. Project Manager: Okay so interface-wise, is it this third option we have, the two of them there? Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yes. One and the L_C_ display. Project Manager: Okay and then buttons, we have what, two colours? Industrial Designer: How many {disfmarker} User Interface: Um we have um got some push buttons as well. Marketing: Or even clear. Industrial Designer: We've got push buttons as well. Project Manager: Like uh oh wait so push button and integrated scroll wheel push User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: okay. User Interface: So I reckon we've got one button for this thing'cause it's just one big sheet of rubber. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: I'm not sure if that counts but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay let's just be safe and put like say four buttons for that one. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay um and maybe a special colour for the buttons, so maybe four again. Project Manager: Four. User Interface: You can see we're we're all very far beyond the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So w why are we arriving at the number four? Where does the number four come from? Industrial Designer:'Cause that's one button by its the complexity of twelve buttons. Project Manager: Okay right, Industrial Designer: So we're just estimating that yeah it would be less. Project Manager: so we're writing down four. {vocalsound} Okay. How about these? Are we wanting them in {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: No. Project Manager: no they're just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: is everything gonna be plastic? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Okay. So we're w w quite far over. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Now we're gonna {disfmarker} something's gonna have to go. Um we're at sixteen point eight and {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh how mm-hmm {disfmarker} how are we going to achieve this high-end product if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well we h something has to go to the tune of two point t three Euro, Marketing: We only have very sparse {disfmarker} Project Manager: so let me see, what are we {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Marketing: Two point three? Four point three no? Project Manager: oh yes sorry, four point three. My maths is all out. User Interface: Well we could take out ones by making it single curved, just fill in those bits. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: How much would that save us? Marketing: And then where is the {disfmarker} Project Manager: How much would that save us? Industrial Designer: That will only save you one. User Interface: That is one. Industrial Designer: The other thing could be that um you could take away the L_C_D_ panel and the advanced chip together, Project Manager: One. Industrial Designer: um because when you do something on the T_V_, the T_V_ responds and reacts as well, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: so the user could be looking at the T_V_ and pushing his thing so we may not need to {disfmarker} User Interface: That's fair enough, yeah. Industrial Designer: so when we scroll we need just some way to get the T_V_ to respond, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: which I think is a technically doable thing so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay so {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w what's our reviewed suggestion? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um take away the L_C_ display? Industrial Designer: Yep. And the advanced chip goes away as well. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: To be replaced with a Industrial Designer: Regular chip. Project Manager: regular chip. Industrial Designer: Yep. So what that means is that um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} And so we've got point three to get rid of. Um and we ha where are the four {disfmarker} the four push buttons are where exactly now? Industrial Designer: The twelve buttons that you see there {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Twelve buttons. User Interface: That's um one piece of rubber but it's gonna have twelve button things underneath so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Functionally you're gonna have to intercept {disfmarker} So four is a good estimate for {disfmarker} Project Manager: Do you think? Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you can't actually cut {vocalsound} {disfmarker} It's like three times the number of buttons, four, eight, twelve. Project Manager: Like is is that one big button or is it twelve buttons, Industrial Designer: It {disfmarker} It needs to be more than one big button because if you open up your phone, underneath there's actually one button underneath, it's just that the panel itself is a single panel. Project Manager: how can it be something in between? Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm. Okay Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: well we have point three to get rid of somewhere. Industrial Designer: We just report that it has to be over budget {vocalsound}, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: or the colours, you could take away s colours for th for the buttons. Project Manager: No can do. Marketing: Yeah we could just go with um {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah w Industrial Designer: Normal coloured buttons. Project Manager: Well do you want colour differentiation here? Industrial Designer: No that's not the button we're talking about. User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh yeah sorry yeah then. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: the buttons only refer to the pad so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Should we take that off uh? Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hey it's back to the original. Project Manager: That's it. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Um so then these just become normal coloured buttons, so that might be some some way of cutting the cost. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, ach that's a shame. {vocalsound} Um right, so take away that completely? Ah. And now we're under budget. So we do have point five Euro to play with if we wanted. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} So I reckon {disfmarker} Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: How about with embossing the logo, isn't that going to cost us some money? Project Manager: Doesn't say so. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. That's a freebie. User Interface: Reckon that probably counts as a special form for the buttons. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah that's a good idea. Just one? Does that mean that one button has a special form or {disfmarker} User Interface: I think {gap} there's just one button so Project Manager: Yeah okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: handy {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Well well there we go. So I'm just gonna have to redraw this now. So we're not gonna have the L_C_D_ anymore, and we'll just gonna have an on t on the T_V_ it'll show you what you're doing, which I think is fair enough, and so this is gonna be one big thing here. Um. Marketing: Was the goal in your in your prototype design that it be as low profile as possible? Industrial Designer: What do you mean by profile? Marketing: {vocalsound} Sort of flat as possible. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No. User Interface: You see I envision it as being um quite deep Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: sort of {vocalsound} deep enough to be comfy to hold in your hands rather than being wide and flat. Marketing: Yeah that's what I was thinking, to Industrial Designer: We didn't have enough Play-Doh to make it three D_. {vocalsound} Marketing: Sure, okay. Yeah alright yeah fair enough. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, just thought I'd ask. Industrial Designer: So there's one more dimension to the thing which we need to to add, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you might want to add in the report, length, width, and height. Project Manager: Right okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: So just to well to be thorough then, width-wise we're looking at about what three centimetres or something? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay and then so height-wise {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: How how tall do you envisage it being? About that big? Industrial Designer: Two. User Interface: Yeah it works, yeah. Project Manager: About two centimetres, okay. Marketing: Two's not very high at all though. Industrial Designer: This is about this is about two. Marketing: Maybe a bit higher? Industrial Designer: Slightly more than two, so {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. User Interface: See, about that thick. Project Manager: Okay. Ach, that is {disfmarker} Marketing: Maybe closer to three even or two and a half. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay we'll s we'll say two point five. Okay um so we have it within cost anyway. Um so yeah project evaluation is this point. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right uh. Okay so can we close that? This is what it's {disfmarker} the final spec that it's gonna be. Someone is gonna have to {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: yeah that's fine that's fine. Marketing: Um it's probably just {disfmarker} I dunno if it's worth getting into, but um just in in that we want this to be stylish, should we think a little bit more out of the box in terms of a button grid, because I've seen there's lots of devices out there that that instead of taking your standard nine nine square grid, and they have it sort of stylized or in different concept that that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that's something that's very hard to catch, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so you you restrict the number of people who wanna try something. Marketing: Sure, okay. Industrial Designer: The the look and the colour is something which is cool, Marketing: Yeah, alright. Industrial Designer: but I think that there's also that factor of if it's too unfamiliar Marketing: Okay, sure. Industrial Designer: then um {disfmarker} because when you put it on the shelf {disfmarker} Marketing: What about button shape? Square buttons? Industrial Designer: Yeah button shape might be a good idea to change, rather than rather than positioning, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer:'cause I think positioning is {disfmarker} we're kinda engrained into the the telephone kind of Marketing: Yeah. Sure. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: pad. Project Manager: Right um. So at this point we uh, let me see, discuss uh how satisfied we all are with um with these four points, with the room for creativity in the project, and leadership and teamwork, and the stuff we had around us I guess. Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Um, let me see uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Do you want me to d um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Do you want me to do my um design evaluation last? Industrial Designer: Maybe we should do the design evaluation first. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah I wasn't really sure what that was {disfmarker} Marketing: Or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Marketing: Evaluation. Project Manager: , yeah go for that first. I wasn't entirely sure what uh {disfmarker} who was supposed to be doing that, Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: but y you go for it. Marketing: Sure. Um, alright so the way this works, I'm gonna need to plug into PowerPoint, Project Manager: {gap} Okay. Marketing: I'll try and do it as quick as possible. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um, this is um {disfmarker} I'll just go over your head if that's okay. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I don't think you need the power, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: What's that? Industrial Designer: No, that's okay that's okay. Marketing: I don't need the PowerPoint? Industrial Designer: No, the power cord itself. Marketing: Oh {gap} course, Industrial Designer: Yeah, so then you have a bit more freedom to {disfmarker} Marketing: yeah that's true. Let me get that. A bit more. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, Industrial Designer: You you still have your blue fingers. Marketing: so what this is is a set-up for us to um uh use a kind of a like a {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Is it? Industrial Designer: You killed a monster. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: The idea is that I've set up {disfmarker} I've reviewed all of the um the points of discussion from the beginning, and used that as a criteria of evaluation for the um uh for the current design uh th or the plan, and uh so we can review that. Uh I think it's gonna end up being sort of elementary because we're sort we're in n we're not gonna probably use it to change anything but {disfmarker} Doesn't seem like it's going, does it? Project Manager: Oh there it is. Marketing: Yeah, okay great. Uh and I'm gonna write up our results on the board, so this'll be a way for us to go through and decide if we're um {disfmarker} sort of review where we stand with it. Okay, so um {disfmarker} So to sort of b bring together two things, sort of design goals and also the market research that we had, uh when we rate this, one is v high in in succeeding or fitting to our original aim and seven is low, Project Manager: Mm'kay. Marketing: okay. So these i these i th are the {disfmarker} and um we've been asked to uh to collectively rate this, so what we can do is try and just y work on a consensus system so we just come to an agreement. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay? So the first one uh, stylish look and feel. Industrial Designer: I rate that pretty highly. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean compared to most remote controls you see that's pretty good. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I dunno like a six or something. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What does anybody else think? Marketing: Yeah um me uh my only reservation with it was that we basically went with yellow because it's the company's colour, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: and I don't know if yellow's gonna really be a hit. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: But {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: I'm seeing five then. Marketing: What do you guys think? Project Manager: I would say five or six. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yep I'm fine with that. Project Manager: David? Marketing: Okay let's go with five then. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Fi oh uh just actually the opposite. Industrial Designer: It's one to seven, right? Project Manager: Oh yes Marketing: The {disfmarker} Project Manager: sorry then Marketing: So it meant three, Project Manager: , then I would say two or three. Marketing: okay. Industrial Designer: Wait, what's the scale, one to seven, right? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, one is high. User Interface: One's high-ish isn't it? Ah, okay so yeah, two or three. Marketing:'Kay {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, it's upside-down. Marketing: Let's go with two point five then. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay, um {vocalsound} control {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: high tech innovation. Project Manager: Well it has the wee jog-dial Marketing: We had to remove {disfmarker} Project Manager: but {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, so we've had to remove a few of our features we wanted, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: but jog-dial Industrial Designer: Say it's more Project Manager: I'd go with three or four, Marketing:'s good. User Interface: Eight Industrial Designer: medium, Project Manager: maybe three. User Interface: three. Industrial Designer: but going towards a little bit higher than medium kind of thing. Marketing: Okay, Project Manager: Yeah about three, okay. Marketing: three? Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Okay, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Style reflects a fruit inspired colour, design. Industrial Designer: Lemon. Marketing: I shouldn't have said colour, but just {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay, the blue the blue colours and {disfmarker} don't re don't actually represent the colour, Project Manager: Well that's kind of {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorta. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: except for the b the the red button, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: they {disfmarker} because for want of a {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: But the yellow, I mean it could be a lemon yellow colour, Marketing: Right. Yeah, could be. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, the the yellow is more representative of the colour, Project Manager: couldn't it? Industrial Designer: but the button itself, the blue can be anything else. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay. Okay so we'll go two. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay, and um design is simple to use, simple in features. Project Manager: Well yeah, I mean it's really basic looking isn't it? Marketing: F f yeah f fairly basic, Project Manager: I mean I'd give that nearly a one. Marketing: you guys think? User Interface: Yeah {gap} one. Industrial Designer: Yep, that's fine. Marketing: Yeah, one? Okay. {vocalsound} Um, {vocalsound} soft and spongy, have we achieved that? We've used mostly plastic in the end so it's going to be quite a bit of a compromise for price. User Interface: Yeah I think it's about five. Marketing: Five? Project Manager: Five? That's really low. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah well we have to use uh plastic Project Manager: Yeah I suppose mm'kay. Marketing: That's {disfmarker} User Interface: so it's probably gonna be {disfmarker} Marketing: Um Industrial Designer: Yeah, company logo. Marketing: could we have used an entirely rubber frame to it? Was that an option? Industrial Designer: I think it'll be cost prohibitive, User Interface: I think I'd probably increase the cost. Marketing: It would cost more than plastic. User Interface: We've only got {vocalsound} like what, ten cents left so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: yeah. Marketing: Okay, logo, we've got it in there, haven't we? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager: Yep. Gonna have that on the side, aren't we, like there or something? Marketing: Huh. And um it's within budget, yep. It is, isn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, so we can say then that uh out of a possible {disfmarker} or what would be our goal here? Project Manager: Out of forty nine, I guess. Marketing: Yeah, out of forty nine with with zero being the highest. We are at uh two, seven, eight, ten, fifteen point five. Project Manager:'S pretty good. Marketing: So it's pretty good. Translates to something like about approximately seventy two percent efficacy of our original goal. Right? Project Manager: Uh yeah. Marketing: I think'cause if you turn that into a hundred it would be about Project Manager: Twice that, Marketing: about thirty one, Project Manager: about thirty one. Marketing: and then invert that, it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: So yeah ab well yeah about sixty nine, seventy percent yeah. Marketing: Oh right, about seventy, yeah seventy percent. Project Manager: It's pretty good. Marketing: Okay, good. That was just a little formality for us to go through. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep, oh hundred pound pen. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry {vocalsound} {vocalsound} alright. Project Manager: Nobody saw it, honestly. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} No. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} The cameras did. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: Is that you all have all finished, or {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah that's that's me. I did have one other um one other frame I thought, I mean I I d not knowing how we would deal with this information, I thought okay in theory this kind of a process would be about refining our design, revisiting our original goals. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: It's not something I need to p push through, but I thought should we thinking more about the dimensions, um sort of like more of a three dimensional shapes as well as opposed to just that flat um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Could our design involve a series of colours so that it's more of like a line where we have like sort of the, I don't know like the harvest line or the vibrant, Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: I dunno the {gap} {disfmarker} Whatever just some theme and then we have different tones, lime green, lemon. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: It's just discussion. I mean obviously we can just abandon this, it's fine. I'm just thinking about what we originally set out to do. Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Um, yep so there. That's all. Project Manager: Okay, great um are you submitting the the um evaluation criteria or am I? I don't know what your instructions have been. Marketing: Um, I think to record it and uh I haven't been asked to submit it yet. Project Manager: Okay, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: uh just wondering if I need to include it in the minutes, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because if you're submitting it anyway then {disfmarker} Marketing: I will, yeah. Project Manager: Okay great. Industrial Designer: It keeps getting too big. Project Manager: Cool. Um right, uh well next up then, because we've done finance, is the project evaluation. Industrial Designer:'Kay I'm I'm listening I'm just trying to incorporate the logo into the the thing, so I'm playing with the Play-Doh as well. Project Manager: Oh right, okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just in case you're wondering {vocalsound}, why is he still playing with the Play-Doh? {vocalsound} Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Just about right User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: L_E_G_O_ Lego {vocalsound}. {gap} User Interface: My leg. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Right, okay. Um well do you wanna um just individually say what you think about about these four points and {vocalsound} {disfmarker} or not those four points, my four points, sorry, forgotten that. {vocalsound} You got a different uh {disfmarker} Marketing: {gap} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: Yep. I like those printer cables that just have the two little butterfly clips like that. Project Manager: Oh yeah, they're good aren't they, yeah. Marketing: It's really quick. Project Manager: Right okay, Marketing: To use. Project Manager: um yeah here we are. Uh as a note we'll do this alphabetically. {vocalsound} Um do you wanna start Andrew? Marketing: Sure, um so what is it you're asking of me now? Project Manager: I don't know, just um your opinion on those four those four points really and how we used them. Marketing: Or sort of our work on setting this up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Well, is it {disfmarker} uh okay I'll just go through your system then. The the room uh is fairly institutional, but um the main thing is, I think um our use of this space is more just to report on things as opposed to be creative and constructive and it would probably help to um have l sort of a cumulative effect of we have ideas and we come back and then the ideas are still in discussion, you know, Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: as in other words this this room is sort of a centre point of creativity, whereas in reality as we've gone through this, it's not really the centre point of creativity, it's more just a Project Manager: Well d do you feel though that that you were able to have quite a lot of creative input into the thing? Marketing: d debating {disfmarker} Yeah, yeah but that's just the thing is the quest in terms of the the first point there, the room, it feels as though the creativity goes on when we leave, and then we come here and then we kind of put out our ideas and then, you know. Project Manager: But I don't I don't think it means the room as in this room. I think it means like you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh, oh right right, oh right okay room for creativ Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh right I just looked up and saw okay whiteboard, digital pens, the room. Project Manager: Room. Oh yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: No, of course, yeah. Project Manager: Well I dunno do you th I think it means um I think it means did you feel you were able to give creative input so {disfmarker} Marketing: Sorry. Huh. Yeah. Yeah I th okay on th um yeah dif answering the question uh in those terms I'd say that actually there's sort of a tease of creativity because we're asked to work through this, but actually the guidelines are fairly contrived in terms of um okay fashion trends, say fruit and vegetable colour scheme, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but then i then we're told okay use the co company company colours. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: So what do we do. We're told okay um think in terms of style and look and feel and technology, but build something for twelve and a half pounds, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: so actually the creativity was more more of like a um a f sort of a f formality then an actual {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: You feel like you're caged within whatever y Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah within the constraints Industrial Designer: It's like a balloon in a cage, it can only go so big and not hit the side. Marketing: the {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: The constraints do come in very fast. Project Manager: Okay uh do you know what, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: actually let's take each point and everybody discuss it, I think. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So still on the topic of room for creativity uh next up is Craig. User Interface: Um I agree with his point it's um it is quite a lot of fun t to go and then you have sort of hit the end then go right, gotta cut everything out'cause we don't have enough money. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: I think another point is that the meetings um are more brainstorming sessions than meetings, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so time is also a very s um strong factor, and structure. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Because for a brainstorming meeting you want a structure that allows you to {disfmarker} allows ideas to get tossed, um to be evaluated, and to be reviewed, and to get feedback and come back. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: And I guess that point about the room not being r very friendly to that, I think that's a very big thing, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think the fact that we're wearing these things restricts {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, sure. Industrial Designer: I feel it'cause I wear m my glasses, right, and that but that irritates me right Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: it it it does actually you know affect how, w whether you feel comfortable to communicate. Marketing: Yeah. New creativity. Industrial Designer: I feel like I'm hiding behind the equipment, rather than the equipment is helping me, and you know. Marketing: Yep. Project Manager: So you think a more relaxed atmosphere would be more kind of conducive to creative thought or {disfmarker} Marketing: Right. Industrial Designer: Not not so much an atmosphere, the atmosphere is very relaxed, but the the gear Project Manager: Yeah, but actual environment? Industrial Designer: yeah you know that creates boundaries to that um Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: and and the time the time given also restricts {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Very good. Um what about leadership? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't know if that means like, if I did a good job or something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I don't really know. Marketing: Yeah, well well I mean my sense on that is sort of what kind of guidance and direction, encouragement {disfmarker} Project Manager: From like your personal coach person and stuff like that, do you think maybe? Marketing: Yeah from {disfmarker} and you as well I think, just sort of acting as team leader. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Um yeah I think I think it's Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Excuse me. Marketing: I think it's good. I mean my personal views on on leadership is that effective effective leadership sort of um gives people a certain room for freedom and delegation, but then to come back with something that they take great ownership and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: you know, innovative thought with. In in reality I think here the the different elements of leadership such as the the original b briefing and then the personal coach and the and then you know having having you with your {disfmarker} the meeting agenda is actually quite a quite a {vocalsound} quite a con confining framework to work within. And so it is leadership almost to the point of sort of disempowering the the the team member, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh-huh, okay. Marketing: But it's not bad leadership, it's just sort of s fairly strong, you know. It turns it turns the individual into more of like a um sort of a predetermined mechanism, as opposed to a sort of a free {disfmarker} Project Manager: So you think maybe a little too controlling or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, oh yeah, without without a doubt. Industrial Designer: I think controlling is not the right word, I think the interactions are very structured. Marketing: Yeah maybe not co confining. Industrial Designer: I think structure is probably what you're saying that, each individual is structured to one particular task, and one parti rather than controlling. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I don't think there's a sense of control'cause all the decisions have been made in terms of a, like a consensus right, we go around and we think about it, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but that you know process actually says you have to do it in a certain way. Project Manager: Uh-huh. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It doesn't tell you, you know, some ways that you might wanna be a bit more creative in terms of the process you know, not the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay, uh what about teamwork? Marketing: Um did, you wanna comment Craig? User Interface: Uh, reckon that was a bit hard because we could only discuss things in the meeting. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: If we could just go up to somebody outside the meeting and have a quick talk with them, that would've been a lot easier. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: I think you tried to use the common share folder to to to to communicate, Marketing: Fully agree. Industrial Designer: but um it just comes back to us so slow in the email Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: um it it doesn't have a, you know, a messenger will go {vocalsound}. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Did uh did you guys get the email I sent you? Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Oh that's alright. User Interface: Not just yet. Project Manager: I was wondering if that got there okay. Marketing: Yeah, got the email. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: Okay, um so um to s to to summarize the teamwork issue, saying that if we could communicate outside the meeting, you know just like quick questions, quick thoughts, whatever, it probably would be bit easier. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I think the tools that they were given, the tool set that were given to us are fancy but they don't support collaboration, I think that's the word. Marketing: Yeah, in it {disfmarker} Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: They don't support the team working together, you know, Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Marketing: exactly. Yeah, I mean if you {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: they're still very individual tools. Marketing: Yeah, I mean sort of taking upon that idea, w the way I see this i is that it's uh the the s the structure in which we've we've approached this whole task is quite contrary to the p principle of teamwork because the the tasks were d d sort of um divided, and then the work went on in isolation Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I I don't know what you guys did while you were together, maybe that was a bit different, Industrial Designer: We had Play-Doh fun {vocalsound}. Marketing: but um yeah, but um but actually if you if you imagine not entire the completely same task given to us but us said okay, first thing we have to do is come up with um let's say um a design concept, and we sit here together and do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: well that's what teamwork is. To s to say okay go off and don't talk to each other, it's actually p sort of predisposes you to quite the contrary of teamwork. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Marketing: Um not that we haven't done I think the best we could have done. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: I'm not dissatisfied with it. Project Manager: Right, uh anything else to say on teamwork at all? Industrial Designer: No, not really. Project Manager: Okay, um what about the you know how we used the whiteboard, the digital pens, the projector, stuff like that? Um did anybody think anything was like really useful, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: anything was pretty un f {vocalsound} unsupportive? Marketing: I think the whiteboard, for me, is the kind of thing I would use all the time, but it's um not quite as useful as to us as it could have been, maybe just in the way that we we use it, in the sense that once we have an idea out there or while work was going on in between meetings, that could have been up on a board uh you know as opposed to in like in text. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Um, and then we could then keep our ideas sort of building on that. I know that people who design cars and you know in aviation they quite often just have a simple like fibreglass prototype and it's completely you know um abs abstract from the final product, but they use it as a kind of a context to sort of walk around and puzzle and and point and discuss Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Yeah. And point at? Yeah. Marketing: and and and in a way everybody's {disfmarker} as we discuss things in the {disfmarker} in theoretically and out of our notebooks, we're just {disfmarker} we're actually just each of us discussing something that's in each of our own minds. It wasn't until we had this here, you know, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: like at one point I peeked across and looked at Craig's paper and I'm like, now I know what he's thinking'cause I saw his book. Project Manager: Ah. Marketing: But the b the b whiteboard could've actually been this kind of continuing um {disfmarker} Project Manager: So do you think producing a prototype earlier in the process woulda been a good idea? Marketing: Think could be, yeah. Industrial Designer: I think um the the focus of it a lot was the PowerPoint as opposed to the to the whiteboard, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: and I think that m um is also does you know hinder us and things I think. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: It will be cooler to have the whiteboard rather than the the PowerPoint, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: or maybe the whiteboard and the PowerPoint in the same place, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: you know in the centre of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, because the PowerPoint was provided to us while we had time to prepare, whereas I can imagine if I'd been encouraged to use Paintbrush, for example, or whatever, I would've actually used it, Project Manager: Alright. Marketing: um'ca you know, just'cause that's sorta how we {disfmarker} what we were set up to to use while we had our time. Project Manager: Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think that there were too many PowerPoints in the meetings {vocalsound}.'Cause the plug-in and the plugging spent {disfmarker} we spent a lot of time doing that. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And a lot of the information on the PowerPoints, I don't think, you know, we needed to actually {disfmarker} it could have, we could have gone through it {gap} verbally, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: No, not quite. Industrial Designer: especially my slides, Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I felt that they just you know {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: as opposed to having to present them. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: What about the digital pens, did you find them easy enough to use? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yep clunky. Marketing: {vocalsound} Sure, yeah. User Interface: Oh they're a bit clunky. Industrial Designer: Agreed. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yep. Project Manager: Clunky, okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Having to tick it before you go off was a bit hindering as well,'cause you're half way through a thought, and then you run out of paper and then you have to jump. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: I know, I think at the very start of today I like wrote a whole load of stuff, didn't click note on one, Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: then went back and wrote one tiny wee thing on the another page, but then did click note, and so I'm quite worried that I've just written over the top of it or something, Marketing: Hmm. Hmm. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: but they'll have my paper anyway um and haven't done that since. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: But I think the pen is v is very intuitive, everybody knows how to use it, we don't {gap} have to worry. Project Manager: Yeah, Marketing: Mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: So I think the pen's good. Project Manager: yeah. Marketing: mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: It's about the best thing. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: And o on the topic of the technology, it just occurred to me that we actually didn't need to move our computers because each computer has all of the files. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: It just occurred to me that they all {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah we only needed one computer and {disfmarker} Marketing: We only actually needed one computer. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: If there had been a fifth, that coulda just been sitting there ready to go the whole time. User Interface: Good point. Industrial Designer: And the computer may not um be conducive to a meeting because um you tend to look at your computer and wanna have the urge to check something, you know, Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: it's useful but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you think the computers just provide distraction in a meeting? Industrial Designer: I think too many computers are just distracting. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. I know I I like to have things written down in front of me actually, like a lot of the stuff that was emailed to me I ended up you know like writing down there or something so I could look at it really quickly and not have the distraction of all of that, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yep. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: um I don't know about anybody else. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} what else uh any wh I do I'm not really sure what they're looking for when they say new ideas found. Um I don't know is {disfmarker} User Interface: Is this for the project or {disfmarker} Project Manager: could you think of like anything else that would have been helpful today at all? Marketing: Well, the w main one for me is that uh the process na in a natural f context would not have been interrupted by this necessity to discommunicate ourselves from each other. Project Manager: Mm. Yeah if we just had uh {disfmarker} Marketing: So, that's kind of a new idea for me is like just sort of that idea, well you know it's kind of s hard to keep f working forward on a team a team based project when when you're told you must now work away from your team. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Yeah I I dunno I think it was quite good that we had time limits on the meetings because they really could have run on and like my experience with meetings is that they really do, and you can spend a lot of time talking about {disfmarker} Marketing: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: The only thing is though like when we had our meeting about the conceptual design, I thought there {disfmarker} maybe another fifteen minutes would have been useful there but um {vocalsound} yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: I really thi i I think maybe if we'd like all been working in the one room, and they just said you know like every hour or something everybody make sure yo you know just have a have a short meeting and then just c Marketing: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: just to have like something written down, just like you know a a milestone if you like um rather than having meetings, but {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: There you go. Um so in closing, Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I haven't got my five minutes to go. Thin Oh there it i Five minutes to go. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Wonderful. Okay um are the costs within the budget, yes they are. And is the project evaluated, yes it is. So now celebrate {vocalsound}. Marketing: Great. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And we have Ninja Homer. Marketing: So it {disfmarker} So now we {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well apparently now I write the final report. What are you guys doing now? User Interface: Do we know what the other ones are? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I I don't know. Project Manager: You dunno? User Interface: Oh wow. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: That is lovely. {vocalsound} User Interface: Hey yeah, I said Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Marketing: What did you call it? Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. See it looks like Homer Simpson Marketing: Huh, huh. Industrial Designer: but it's electronic so it's made in Japan. Project Manager: So is that j is that just is that just a logo or does it do anything? Marketing: Logo. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah it's just a logo. Project Manager: Just a logo and then like Ninja Homer, Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Ninja Homer. {vocalsound} Project Manager: right okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm. Industrial Designer: The the red is supposed to represent the whatever else you wanna print on the side of it. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think it's quite nice. Marketing: Fashion technology or something. Industrial Designer: You can wear Homer, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: you can throw Homer when you're frustrated, doh. {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm, hmm, hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh no, that's cool, it's got {disfmarker} I'm kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's clunky. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I'm slightly gutted that we couldn't get plastic and rubber, I think that would have been nice. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ah well, maybe from now on real reaction should give us more money. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, I did learn something new, Play-Doh is useful. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: No it is it is. Project Manager: Play-Doh s Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It is useful and in in in in in in in um conceptualizing, in being creative. Marketing: Huh. Huh. Industrial Designer:'Cause like you say, it's something you can put your hands on and feel and touch and get a sense for. Project Manager: Really? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Like we were playing with the Play-Doh and the ideas came with the Play-Doh rather than with everything else. Project Manager: Did they? Industrial Designer: You might wanna write that down. It's just, I'm just fiddling with the Play-Doh, and I'm going yeah yeah it's kinda cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Play-Doh. Marketing: No, it's true, yeah. User Interface: Guess I'd forgot how good s Play-Doh smells. Project Manager: Yeah, it smells funny doesn't it. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Hmm. And some Play-Dohs are actually I think edible aren't they? Industrial Designer: No, all Play-Doh is edible. Project Manager: Yeah like the stuff for {gap} {disfmarker} User Interface: I think they're all non-toxic'cause it's aimed for like two-year-olds. Project Manager: I think it has to be, yeah. Industrial Designer: It's just wheat, it's the stuff that your mom could make with preservatives and uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah um so to Marketing: Wow, hmm. Project Manager: wha what are your summarising words about Play-Doh? Industrial Designer: It's helpful to the creative process. Marketing: Huh. Industrial Designer: Um it engages all your senses not just your sight, but your sense of feel your sense of touch. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yep. Industrial Designer: And it helps you to understand Marketing: Taste. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} dimension as well. I think that that's very helpful because it it starts to pop up, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: whereas on a piece of paper, on a computer, on a board, um even with a three D_ graphic thing it still, it requires a lot of Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Mm-hmm, yep. Yeah. User Interface: Yeah Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: it's not very tangible. Industrial Designer: yeah {disfmarker} tangible, that's a nice word. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm, Industrial Designer: It becomes tangible. Marketing: mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Tangible. Okay uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Mm. I don't know if there's anything else we needed to discuss. Industrial Designer: Nope. Project Manager: That that's about it really. Just sit still I guess for a little while. Marketing: Do we retreat to our, to continue our Industrial Designer: I think we could probably do it here as long as we don't collaborate. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: r reporting or what i Project Manager: Well I dunno. Um I'm sure the little uh the little thing'll pop up any minute now. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Can we turn off the microphones? Project Manager: Yeah, yeah if the meeting's over then yeah I guess so. Marketing: {vocalsound}

This was the final meeting of detailed design. To start with, Project Manager introduced the planned scheme of the meeting, followed by User Interface and Industrial Designer indicating the possible changes into an LCD screen and a jog-dial. After that, the group continued to talk about the slogan, the button size, and the button color. However, considering the budget, they consistently abandoned some of the designs. These included kinetic power, rubber material, LCD panel, advanced chip, and special colored buttons. Marketing moved the discussion to evaluate the current design through collectively rating from one to seven. The final part was the project evaluation, including the system, leadership, teamwork, and tools given.

tr-sq-42

tr-sq-42_0

Summarize the presentation and discussion about the design of the remote. Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

User Interface preferred a more user-friendly remote with nice big buttons and limited number of buttons. She also gave her suggestions about the symbol and colour of the remote. Then, they discussed the number of buttons on the remote.

tr-sq-43

tr-sq-43_0

What did Project Manager think of the symbol and colour of the remote when discussing the design of the remote? Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

User Interface suggested that they could design the symbols and colours for the remote. However, the Project Manager reminded the team that they should put their own logo and colour scheme on the remote, which means that they could not design those things by themselves.

tr-sq-44

tr-sq-44_0

What is the decision of the discussion about the number of buttons on the remote? Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

The team agreed that there should be 17 buttons on the remote, including number 0 to 9, volume up and down, mute, channel up and down, stand-by and power buttons. Besides the buttons of brightness and contrast should be put on the back of the remote.

tr-sq-45

tr-sq-45_0

Summarize the presentation about the customer's functional requirements of the remote and the team's discussion about it. Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

According to the research of Marketing, three quarters of the customers thought that their remotes are ugly. People only concentrated on the channel buttons, the volume buttons and the power buttons, and other buttons on the remote were seldom pressed. Many customers found it frustrating when their remotes were lost somewhere else in the room and they couldn't find them. Besides, it was difficult for people to learn all the functions on the remote. Then the team discussed the idea of a speech recognition system for the remote.

tr-sq-46

tr-sq-46_0

What did Marketing suggest about the functions of the remote? Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

Marketing suggested that the remote should be good looking and high-tech. And they should concentrate on the functions of changing channels and volumes. Besides, they could also think about using speech recognition as a way for people to find the remote control if it's lost in a room.

tr-sq-47

tr-sq-47_0

What did Industrial Designer think about the idea of speech recognition when discussing the function of the remote? Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

Industrial Designer thought that the technology would be quite advanced and they might end up costing more than 25 budgets for speech recognition.

tr-gq-48

tr-gq-48_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: Right uh. So um. So where's the PowerPoint presentation? Sorry? Microsoft PowerPoint, right. Right, okay. So. Right. Okay, so we've got uh so we've got new project requirements. Um. So basically we've got three things, and we've got forty minutes in which to uh {disfmarker} for this meeting to uh to discuss the various options. Um. Three presentations. Industrial Designer: We have a {disfmarker} I guess we have a presentation each,'cause I've got one. Um. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah, Project Manager: I see, right. Marketing: I've got one too. Project Manager: That's nice to know, one from each of you. Um new project requirements. Um so do we want to do the presentation first, or do we want to um {disfmarker} W I I got um {gap} or or three things basically, um relating to the remote being only for T_V_. We discussed that last time Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and in actual fact that was pr pretty well what we came up with anyway. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So in fact it actually f we won't be forestalled {vocalsound} in a sense. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Um we've got uh teletext outdated. Um did you get any information on that? Industrial Designer: Uh we didn't, no. User Interface: No. Project Manager: Right and the corporate image was the uh final thing. Industrial Designer: I d I didn't personally. Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: So I I got that in email form. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Um. Right okay. So I guess if we go ahead with the uh with the three presentations. So we'll start with yourself on the basis that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Okay that's fine. I'll just um I'll grab the wire out the back of this one. Project Manager: Sorry, yep. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. {vocalsound} User Interface: What is it? Industrial Designer: I'm not quite sure how it {disfmarker} User Interface: I think you've got to do um control F_ eight. Industrial Designer: Control {gap} {disfmarker} Doesn't seem to be quite working at the moment. User Interface: Shift F_ eight. {vocalsound} {gap} Industrial Designer: Alt function F_ eight. {vocalsound} Again not doing anything. Marketing: {vocalsound} There's usually a little thing in the top right for the {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh. User Interface: Ah there, Marketing: Oh hang on, User Interface: it's doing something. Marketing: it's just coming on. Industrial Designer: {gap} pressed about five times now. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay, that's me {gap}. Okay, um I have to go {gap} again. Project Manager: {gap} it going? Industrial Designer: Hopefully that should be it this time. Okay, I think we're there. That's good. Okay, um {disfmarker} Okay I'm gonna be looking at the working design. Um {vocalsound} of the of the remote control. Um I've just got three sections, first is the research I made on the on the remote control itself um. And then that involves the components required in it and the systems uh design of the actual the actual remote. Um so having researched the existing models within the market, um I found my research off the internet. Um I've established what the components required for the remote control to function, actually are. And then also the methods in which these components interact together for the remote to actually do what you want it to do and how it connects with the television. Um the basic components are an energy source which I guess um in most existing models would be a battery supply. Whether that'll be sort of two batteries, four batteries, um it may vary. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: We then have the user interface, which is basically the like the the buttons on the actual remote. Um the various functions used for changing channel, uh channel up and down, volume, things like that. Um there's also a chip inside the remote which does all the computer type things. And then the sender, which um is usually, I've found, an infra-red device which sends a signal to the actual television. Um and the last part is receiver which is important in the system but is not actually part of the remote itself, because that's obviously found in the television. {gap}. Um I'm gonna have to actually draw on the board because uh it was a little tricky on PowerPoint to get this working, so. I'll just go through there. S um um do we have a cloth to wipe this down with, or? Oh I'll j Project Manager: Uh there's the rubber on the right, I think. User Interface: I think it's that little {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh I see. Oh okay. I'll get rid of the bear. $ Project Manager: {gap} it's magic. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay that's great. Okay, so we start off with a um battery suppl Uh no, a power supply which we'd probably get {disfmarker} it's probably gonna be the battery. Um we then have a particular button, which may be {disfmarker} {gap} that's obviously there's lots and lots of different buttons. Um but this is how the basic system works. Um that sends {gap} after you press that that sends the message to the chip, which um then sends {disfmarker} It sort of interprets which button you've pressed and then sends the appropriate message to the sender. {vocalsound} Um. So that's {gap}. That's the remote in itself, that's the components of the remote and how they work together. So this is the uh user interface. Um this is the chip itself, which then {gap}, and that's the that's the infra-red sender. And then on the separate thing we have on the on the television we have a a receiver. And the sender sends a message to the receiver.'Kay. Project Manager: So the the top bit's the power source, yes? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Ah yes, that's the power source. Um. {gap} going on to personal preferences, I've said that battery seems the best option for the actual remote, just because of the size. You don't want a a cable attached to the remote otherwise it's not it's not really a remote. Um and then the sender, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and infra-red um has been used quite successfully. If the battery's on reasonable power, they always seem to work fairly well. You don't have to be point directly at the television itself. Project Manager: So the battery is the {disfmarker} in the sender. Industrial Designer: Um {disfmarker} Yes.'Kay and that's it for the moment. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Okay. So, now more design. {vocalsound} User Interface: Right. Thank you. Mine's not quite as complicated as all that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} That's what we like to hear. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Did I press function? Yeah. Project Manager: Is it control function ei Oh, th there you go. User Interface: Oh. Um. Okay so I'm gonna talk a bit about the technical functions design. I'm Louisa, the User Interface Designer, as you know. {vocalsound} Um so the m basic method of this is to send a signal from the remote to the television set, so that a desired function is performed. Um an example of the function could be to change the volume up or down, uh so obviously you need two different buttons for that. Um to change the channel, either by pressing the number that you want or by channel up or down. Um to switch the television on or off, maybe a standby button. Um here are two example remotes. Um by the look of it they both have um kind of play and fast forward, rewind functions, so I think they incorporate a kind of video function which we won't have to worry about. Uh but as you can see, the left remote is quite um quite busy looking, quite complicated. Um whereas the right remote is much simpler, it looks much more user friendly. Um so my personal preference would be the right remote. So, {vocalsound} it's got nice big buttons, it's got a very limited number of buttons. Um they're nice, kinda clearly labelled. Um I like the use of the kind of um symbols like the triangles and the squares and the arrows as well as the words on the um kind of play functions and all that. So it's very very user friendly, and it's got a little splash of colour. Could maybe do with some more colour. Um. Project Manager: Well there's a couple of things there. Um we have to remember that we have our own um logo and colour scheme. So basically we'd have to uh we'd have to be putting that on um the the product. User Interface: Hmm. Do we get to see that? Project Manager: {vocalsound} I haven't as yet, no. User Interface: Will you be presenting that in a bit? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} But uh I got uh I got an email that basically said to uh make sure that uh whatever device we come up with at the end of the day had to incorporate um the corporate colour and slogan. So uh I'm guessing that uh uh I notice on the bottom there it's got uh what's that? A_P_O_G_E_E_ that might be the corporate colour scheme, although the only the only colour I can see in that is the red. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Would you be able to get rid of the the extra buttons here, the the sort of circular section, because that seems to be for a video as well. So we could dispense with that little bit as well and just get it down to just the numbers and the volume. Possibly? User Interface: What do you mean by the circular section? Industrial Designer: J yeah yeah yeah j yeah User Interface: Like all of that bottom bit? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: just this little bit is that {disfmarker} I think that's still um a video remote part, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: so maybe we could get rid of that as well. User Interface: Yeah. And I don't really think that you need nine numbers. Project Manager: Well b uh w User Interface: I mean how often do you use seven, eight and nine? I think just one to six and then channel up and down should be enough. Project Manager: Well th the on the {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Like how often do you hit nine? Project Manager: Well uh for for general television purposes obviously you have channels one to five at this point in time, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and we'd have to have some room for uh future such channels. But but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It's just people are used to seeing that, so if we didn't have them then they might think it's {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: But, well possibly but the the other thing is that with um the current expansion of uh channels uh in the process of taking place, certainly the button up and down, but uh I mean {vocalsound} how many channels do we have to um {disfmarker} actual television channels do we have to uh prepare for? I would have thought that uh {gap} it's forever expanding and at the moment we've got {disfmarker} although you've onl you've got the five standard, you've got the B_B_C_ have come up with a further six Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: and uh there's uh I don't know exactly how many channels there are on uh when you take into account uh Sky and various other um various others. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: So I would've thought that we wouldn't, you know, rather {disfmarker} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: Okay, if the time of flicking from one to other, but presumably it'll take a second User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'cause you have to be able to stop it. Maybe you could have a fast forward on the on the channels that w and then you could dispense with more otherwise. Y you'd want you'd want to get fairly quickly to the channel that you wanted. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Um some remotes have kind of favourite options where if you always flick from channel one to channel six, um if that's a favourite you just like by-pass two to five. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Yeah, I s I suppose in a sense you could have um if you've got a hundred channels then if you had sort of an easy way of getting {disfmarker} rather than having to go one to a hundred, you could go one to one to ten, ten to twenty Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: and then have a second button to get you to the actual channel you want Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and that would cut down your time. User Interface: Mm. Um. Project Manager: Anyway. User Interface: But I think a lot of um like Cable and Sky and stuff, that would be tuned to one channel, and then you'd have another remote for all of those channels. Industrial Designer: Okay, yeah. User Interface: Like to get to fifty five and the higher numbers {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whatever. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Okay. Limit the number of buttons, user friendly. User Interface: But I suppose nine's not really excessive. Industrial Designer: I suppose with nine you've got the the like the last one which makes the tenth means you {disfmarker} uh it's like uh multiples you can put them together so you can make any number. User Interface: I suppose it does make a good pattern. Industrial Designer: So with that we'd kind of by-pass any problems with {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah Well that's true, yeah, Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: you could get fifty by five and a zero or whatever, that that makes sense. Industrial Designer: Yeah.'Cause that facilitates having all the numbers you could ever need. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um. Project Manager: Does. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So w so what was the circular thing that you were {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Um I think that's just for a video, so we wouldn't need any of that at all. Industrial Designer: So we could get it down to what? Project Manager: If it's just for T_V_, which is what it is at the moment. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So we get to {disfmarker} How many buttons have we got? We've just got ten, eleven twelve th We got fourteen that we need. I guess. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Um which isn't really too many. That'll be quite easy to make a user guide for a fourteen button remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Well we've we've got um that it's remote for T_V_ only otherwise project would become too complex with uh which would endanger the time to market {vocalsound} was one of the considerations. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: I'm {disfmarker} I don't know d did you have that information behind the marketing, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: or was I meant to give you that information? Marketing: Um I'm not sure. I had I've had some market information, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: but not from the company, no. Project Manager: Right, okay, so basically time to market seems to be important, therefore speed of delivery. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: We've only got about another four hours left. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay, so is everyone happy with that? Industrial Designer: Ah yes yes, that seems good. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Right well that's the end of my presentation. Marketing:'Kay. I'm gonna pull this off. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think if you just give it a second to maybe catch up. Project Manager: Yeah, I think she said twenty seconds to um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh-huh. Industrial Designer: I'm sure we'll have by the end of today. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} I'll give it another go. Yeah, there we go. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Right, we've done some research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. And first off we should state that th the remote control's for controlling the T_V_ and um how do people use it? We asked them sort of which buttons were useful for them. Um how d how does a remote control look and feel for them, and what improvements would would they like to remote control. And we did that by sort of giving them a questionnaire that we'd prepared and asking them to fill in the answers. And three quarters of them found that remote controls are ugly and that a sort of even higher proportion would spend more for a sort of s uh a fancier remote control And that of all the buttons on the remote control, the sort of setting buttons for sort of the picture picture and brightness and the audio settings, um they weren't used very often at all. People concentrated on the channel buttons and the volume buttons and the power buttons. Uh we also asked them about speech recognition uh for remote control. And young people were quite receptive to this, but as soon as we got sort of over about into a thirty five to forty age {disfmarker} forty five age group and older, people people weren't quite so keen on speech recognition. There's a lot more th there's a lot lot more older people who didn't know whether they wanted it or not as well. Um we also asked what frustrated people about remote controls and the number one frustration was that the remote was lost somewhere else in the room and that they couldn't find it. And the second second biggest frustration what that if they got a new remote control, it was difficult to learn um all the buttons and all the functions, and to find your way around it. {vocalsound} Okay, so {disfmarker} My personal preferences from the marketing is that we need to come up with some {vocalsound} sort of sleek sort of good looking high high-tech {disfmarker} A design which looks high-tech, basically. Um and that we should come up with fewer buttons than most of the controls on the market, and we should sort of concentrate on the channels and sort of power, and also volume and that sort of thing, as as Louisa said. Um we could maybe come up with a menu, a sort of a an L_C_D_ menu for other functions on the remote control. That's worth thinking about. Um and maybe we could think about speech recognition as well, because um sort of young people are perhaps the ones that are gonna buy buy our new product if we aim it at sort of you know sort of a high-tech design. That that might be the market that we're we're looking for. And we could maybe think about using speech recogniti recognition as a way to find the remote control if it's lost in a room, rather than sort of um having it to {vocalsound} speech recognition to change the channels.'Cause there's a problem with that in that the television makes noise, so it could end up talking to itself and changing its channel. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay um, and that's the end of the slide show. That's it. Cool. Project Manager: What was that last wee bit there? User Interface: Do {gap} a lot of um {disfmarker} Marketing: Um about speech recognition? Project Manager: Speech recognition, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But that was only for young people that preferred it, older people didn't. Marketing: Youn young people pref Yeah, they s they said that they'd be interested in a remote control which offered that possibility and as you go up through the age groups, people got less and less interested in sort of a a remote control that you could talk to, so. Industrial Designer: No what I maybe think is um it seems the technology would be quite advanced for that and they might end up costing more than our twelve fifty budget for for the speech recognition. Um. Project Manager: Well that's right. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: And possibly the thing about the about the remote being lost we could have {disfmarker} You know with your mobile phone, you lose that and you can ring it. Maybe we can have some kind of sensor which is kept somewhere where you can {disfmarker} {gap} some kind of buzzer system between the two. So you can press a button which is always kept in one place Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and then it maybe buzzes to somewhere else, wherever the remote actually is. Marketing: Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah, we'd have t that would mean we'd have to put two products together as well, Industrial Designer: That is true, yes. Marketing: which which again would probably be a bit expensive, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: There's key rings um that you kind of whistle at or clap at, I can't remember, and then they whistle back, or something like that. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Sounds reasonable. User Interface: That'd probably be really simple, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: they're cheap. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: So I guess it'd be something we could like attach to the {disfmarker} or like the same technology could be put inside the inside the remote. Project Manager: Well if you're trying to avoid having a second product'cause obviously you could have a second product that gave you the right pitch which would set the remote off to say here I am sort of thing, you know without sound recognition. But if you {disfmarker} I know. Um I was gonna say a sharp noise, you know a clapping of hand or whatever. {vocalsound} You'd want to try and av just have the one product that if {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah if we if we could have it in the actual remote like everything in one one device. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Um I dunno um talking about vo I mean obviously if you've got voice recognition then you can do it in that way because it'll recognise the voice and you can give it a command, a set command whatever that happened to be. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: But you've then got the point if if you're not going with uh voice recognition then {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} you could have an option to turn it off. Or {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Perhaps, um. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So that would solve the problems with the T_V_ kind of speaking to the remote and changing its own channels. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh {vocalsound} Any sugges Well, any conclusions? Marketing: Um would it take quite a while to sort of develop the speech recognition software in the remote control? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well if it does then we can't. Industrial Designer: Mm. Marketing: Considering {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It's that simple, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: because we've got uh th th three um primary um uh requisites from uh from and email uh that was sent to me whereby we had {disfmarker} The design logo was one, which we've already mentioned. We've got um the remote was only for the television and not for {disfmarker} because that would make it too complex and we have to get it market quickly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the uh third thing was that um teletext uh as far as uh the management is concerned, um is becoming dated uh due to the popularity of the internet. So that means that uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: so these are the sort of three um extra parameters that have been put on this uh project. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So we're being focused effectively directly at a television and it seems to me that the management is uh wanting us to go down a narrow path and not opening out. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: So anything that uh is to be added, such as voice recognition et cetera has to be very simple and has to be very quick Industrial Designer: Has to be simple enough to {disfmarker} Project Manager: because time to market is is critical. S Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {gap} I suppose if we could get something in which was quite quick and simple that would give us an advantage over the other remotes. Um. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: It would. But probably quick and simple is primary rather than added extras. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Project Manager: Added extras would be nice, but the primary consideration is to get the project finished within uh this short time window, which effectively now is sort of four hours. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} and if {disfmarker} and we've gotta get to the end. Uh d d I think I think first and foremost we've gotta get to the end and then get to the end with um added extras if possible. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: So {disfmarker} Project Manager: {gap} Right okay, uh so I need to {disfmarker} Right. So I don't know how long we have left of our uh time. But we have to make the decisions on uh the remote control functions Marketing: About five minutes. Project Manager: and how we were planning to proceed so that at the next uh meeting each person that's got a a a task to do is clear from this meeting what that task is. Industrial Designer: Yes. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll also know w when the next meeting is Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I um {disfmarker} so we'll know how long we've got to complete that task. And then we can report back at the next meeting and say right okay yes, we've achieved this or we haven't achieved this, this is how far we've progressed. Does that make reasonable sense? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Yes that seems right. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, yeah. Project Manager: So we have to come effectively to the decision on the remote functions so that you can decide what you're gonna be doing. And if dur between the time of this meeting finishing and the next meeting starting, if you get any additional information that uh only you have at that point in time you'd think would be relevant to other people in terms of their des decision making um process, then we should communicate that as quickly as possible and not wait until the next meeting. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Do it via the email Marketing: Okay. Yep. Project Manager: so that rather than coming you know {disfmarker} If you get the information just before the next meeting that's fine. Come along with it in the next meeting, we can discuss it then and take whatever action is appropriate. Industrial Designer: Okay. Project Manager: But if you get it well before the next meeting, let everybody else know'cause that might have an impact on their uh {disfmarker} on what they come up with {vocalsound} effectively at the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Right, is there {disfmarker} Marketing: So do we need to decide on the functions now? S Project Manager: I would guess so. User Interface: Well I think it'd be really easy and it'd be a big advantage if we did have some sort of um kind of whistle back kind of function. Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface:'Cause that'll solve kind of the frustration of losing it. Marketing: Yeah and {disfmarker} Yeah and that was that was the number one sort of frustration that people said, so. Project Manager: Yep. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: I don't think there's anything else on the market that does that, so. User Interface: Yeah. I don't really know about the voice recognition thing. Project Manager: I {vocalsound} w well uh i Industrial Designer: Maybe we should concentrate just on the whistle back function at the moment, Project Manager: Something simple. Uh if if our primary consideration is to get it there in time, time's short, Industrial Designer: and if something comes back {disfmarker} Project Manager: you want something to meet the major concerns of the consumer so that we can have that as a selling point for the product, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: something that's quick and simple. So, User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: sounds good. User Interface: And that wouldn't put off the kind of older generation either,'cause everyone can whistle or clap, and they wouldn't have to be kind of scared of this new technology. Project Manager: Well, so maybe a clap rather than a whistle would be {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: On the basis that if we've got {disfmarker} if we're catering to the whole age range, you want something that's easy to do, Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: now something that doesn't like whis uh Marketing: No not everyone can whistle, can they, though? {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well I I I don't know. Well If you think that more people can whistle than clap then that's fine, then go for that option, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: but if {disfmarker} I would have thought that more people could clap rather than whistle, Marketing: No, Industrial Designer: I'd go more {disfmarker} Marketing: clapping, I think clapping, Industrial Designer: Yeah, f more for clap. Marketing: yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: so uh so clap option. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface:'Kay we've already decided that we don't need a teletext button, haven't we? Project Manager: Uh. Ef effectively that's what the that's what they're saying, User Interface: Is that one of the {disfmarker} Project Manager: that uh if uh if people are now using the internet then you don't need teletext, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: so so take out teletext. Marketing: {vocalsound} Taking out teletext, okay. Industrial Designer: Did we decide on having the ten um the ten numbers User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: and then the the little digit next to it which kind of enabled you to put them together. User Interface: Yeah, I think so, so zero to nine. Marketing: Mm. I think nowadays you can just get ones where it gives you a sort of a second or two to press another number, Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: so you can press any two and it'll sort of put them together. Industrial Designer: Okay, ten numbers User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and then some kind of device to allow uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I'll put delay to allow um multiple numbers. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Or multiple digits. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Did we decide anything about um the other functions? As in setting the audio and tuning it and stuff like that? You had an had an idea about the menu? Marketing: Uh {vocalsound} we could possibly put an L_ {disfmarker} a sort of a L_C_D_ menu in, but that again is probably an expense that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: But just thinking um people probably {disfmarker} I mean you don't have {disfmarker} you only have to probably tune in the T_V_ once, but you have to be able to tune it that once. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So and if finally the T_V_ breaks, you get a new one, you're gonna have to be able to tune it. You can't really avoid that. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: No. Industrial Designer: Except the new digital markets which do it by themselves. User Interface: Hmm. Project Manager: But the but that's relying on the television market changing to an automatic Industrial Designer: So that'll be in {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: and if it is at the moment, that's fine. But at the moment it's not, so it seems to me that you have to have a device that caters,'cause otherwise it would make it {disfmarker} uh your device would become inoperable, or only operable in certain circumstances Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: and the idea is to have an international market Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: which is {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And it's also m it's the the product we've got is something that's at the I would have said the lower end of the s of the cost scale, so we're not really going for something that's uh terribly high-tech. Marketing: Yeah. I s I suppose um if people are buying remotes, then they're probably buying it to replace another remote Project Manager: Possibly. Marketing:'cause all most tellies come with remotes, so. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: I mean we're maybe talking about replacing remotes for slightly older televisions, so we maybe need to keep the the tuning function in. {gap} Industrial Designer: Yeah. So how would this menu function work? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Would you maybe have like one menu button, then you'd use the other buttons, maybe the number buttons to actually do the separate functions. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah, Marketing: Yeah, User Interface: like the volume or something. Marketing: that would be a good idea, yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. User Interface: Yeah,'cause you do need um kind of brightness and contrast and everything as well. My dad was watching a film the other week Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: and it was too dark, so I had to go through it and turn the brightness up. Industrial Designer: {gap} {gap} we're gonna have the the individual numbers Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: and then a menu function and maybe sort of a slightly more advanced um instruction booklet to come with it, to guide {disfmarker} Presu uh I think it'd be quite hard just for people to grasp um just off like the menu {gap} use different buttons you maybe have to have like some better instructions of how that would actually work. Marketing: Uh {disfmarker} I'm not sure whether the sort of having people have a booklet'cause one {disfmarker} the second most annoying thing that people found was having to learn the new one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right, okay um. Marketing: So maybe next to each of the buttons, you know each of them could have a number and then also a function written next to it, so you're basically pressing {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} that also goes back to the original design when we saw those two, and there was the one on the left hand side which had all like the double functions and stuff which kind of looked too busy and had too much on it, so. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: Okay, well. User Interface: Well, if we're trying to keep it slee sleek and sexy as well, have you seen those remotes where kind of um the bottom bit slides down, so there's kind of um everything else revealed? Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So y Ah That's a very good idea. User Interface: So you don't use it that much, you don't have to see it all the time. But it's all there if you need it. Industrial Designer: That is that is a good idea actually. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Sor sort of a second. Project Manager: So you keep um {disfmarker} User Interface: Like a hidden panel. Project Manager: Right we've got five minutes before we wind up this meeting, so I've been told. I don't know if you've got the same. Industrial Designer: Okay. Uh not quite, but I guess {gap}. Project Manager: Okay. So so keep um keep detailed functions um hidden at the back. Industrial Designer: Keep the other buttons but hide them away. User Interface: Hmm. And that'll be better for the older generation as well'cause, well my dad doesn't like anything that you've got to kinda flick through a menu, Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: but he can pretty much read a button if it's displayed properly. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So um {vocalsound} we're gonna have to have to work out what's gonna be on these other functions as as well. So we're gonna have like two separate two separate lists, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: That's right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} data functions hidden at back. Can bring out when needed. Marketing: So th the {disfmarker} The detailed ones would be sort of brightness, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: uh sorta {disfmarker} Project Manager: That's right so we're dis So you've got which ones are gonna be on the front and which ones are gonna be on the back. We have to decide. Industrial Designer: So sh Should we decide in the next couple of minutes, and then {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I guess so. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: So on front, Industrial Designer: {gap} about the number {gap}. Project Manager: numbers, Industrial Designer: Um the volume up and down. User Interface: And the volume? Project Manager: {vocalsound} volume. Industrial Designer: Shall we have a mute button as well? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Sorry? Industrial Designer: A mute button as well. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Mm. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Or {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah I think they're handy. Marketing: Mm-hmm. And probably a power one as well. {vocalsound} Dunno. User Interface: I know it's probably like um not an issue to raise here, but um the whole thing about not using your standby uh because of the like waste of electricity {gap}. Have you seen the adverts? Like if you boil the kettle that's full that's a waste. Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: If you leave your telly on standby it powers Blackpool for a certain amount of time. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: Like we should maybe try to discourage people from standby. Industrial Designer: But then they might not buy it if they haven't got one.'Cause people might just be too fickle and not want to change. User Interface: Yeah, it's maybe too much of a big issue for here. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} So so are you having the stand-by on the front, then? Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We can send out a flier with the device saying that you shouldn't leave it on stand-by. User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh-oh danger sign. Industrial Designer: I think you probably should. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, but a little bit smaller. Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Compromise. Project Manager: Well {vocalsound} {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um are we gonna have the channel up and down as well as the number buttons? Marketing: Um'cause yeah the market research said there is quite a lot of people do just zap around and flick, so. Industrial Designer: Okay, so we'll have um {disfmarker} User Interface: Right. Industrial Designer: So we've got ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen fifteen sixteen there? Project Manager: Channel up and down. Marketing: Um. Project Manager: What else have we got? What was that, sixteen? Marketing: Numbers is ten, volume is twelve, Project Manager: Volume button. How many volumes? Marketing: th Yeah si One up, one down. Project Manager: Right okay. User Interface: On mute. Marketing: And a mute, yeah. That's sixteen isn't it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Is there anything else? Um. Marketing: I don't think so, no. Project Manager: Power button, stand-by, channel, up and down. So is that it? Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: {gap} so. Project Manager: Okay. That's sixteen buttons, you reckon. And then at the back? Marketing: You've got brightness and contrast. Industrial Designer: Maybe if we're gonna run out of time, one of us should come up with a list of these and then get back at the next meeting just at the start and say what they're gonna be. User Interface: And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So on the back it'll have brightness, contrast, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: anything else? You're also gonna have the channel tuner {gap}, as it were. User Interface: Uh there's audio functions. Industrial Designer: So tuner up and down, I guess. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Tuner, would that have up and down? {gap}. Industrial Designer: Um up {disfmarker} Tune one way, tune the o User Interface: I think they normally do. Project Manager: {gap} okay {gap}. Okay. Industrial Designer: I I dunno I dunno possibly. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: And then maybe sort of an enter button for sort of s you know, saying that you want that particular thing tuned in. So you go up and down and then it pick it finds something and then you wanna press enter to select it, yeah. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah and th and a enter button just to select. Yeah, okay. Um I guess we're keeping s it simple. We don't really need any other audio funct uh functions because it's just volume up, volume down. Project Manager: Um up volume, yeah, I would have thought so. Industrial Designer: Um. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: So I think um there's quite a lot of like Dolby surround studio, surround sort of things. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Do they have their own {disfmarker} do they have their own controls on their actual products, then, Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Um maybe for the younger market. Industrial Designer: or do you have to do it via the remote? User Interface: Um I think they've got their own controls in this kind of like hidden panel. Industrial Designer: Yeah I suppose if we've got their {disfmarker} if they've got their own controls then we can avoid it for ours just to keep it simple. Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. User Interface: Oh no, I mean um like there's kind of individual buttons for them, like on the T_V_ remote. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Right. User Interface: But I don't really know what they're for, Marketing: Mm-hmm. User Interface: I've never used them. Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: I just know they're something to do with Dolby. Industrial Designer: Maybe unless something comes up then we should I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well you might get some research. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well shall we look into that and just get back together. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Right so I'll do the minutes of uh this meeting. User Interface: Right. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: And we'll meet back at I'm not sure. Um forty minutes, I believe is the time. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Come on.

The Project Manager gave a brief review of the team's last meeting, then Industrial Designer, User Interface and Marketing gave their presentation each. Industrial Designer's presentation is about the components and system of the remote control. User Interface gave the presentation about the design of the remote. The team agreed that there should be 17 buttons on the front of the remote and two on the back. Marketing's presentation is about the research into the functional requirements that people want out of their remote control. The team agreed that they could add a clap-back function to the remote.

tr-sq-49

tr-sq-49_0

Summarize Marketing's presentation on functional requirements. Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

Marketing first shared the results of their lab tests. It was found that users preferred a fancier but yet simpler remote, and as a result, their product should be high-tech looking but also user-friendly. Since the research found that most users would only use ten percent of the buttons, they decided to only keep the most necessary ones on their remote. Users also claimed that remotes tend to be lost easily. Finally, since speech recognition was popular among users, the remote should have this function as well.

tr-sq-50

tr-sq-50_0

What did the lab tests tell them about the design of buttons? Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

According to the lab tests, users only use ten percent of the buttons on a remote. It was shown that users didn't really need all the buttons provided by current remotes, and it would be more user-friendly if their new remote could lose the unnecessary ones. The most frequently used buttons were those for the channel, the volume and the power on/off.

tr-sq-51

tr-sq-51_0

What could they do to make the remote more modern and high-class in regard to its function design? Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

One thing they could do was to design a lost-and-found function to accommodate the user's need to retrieve the remote when it was lost. Another way was to give it a modern eye-catching design that could distinguish the new remote from current standard ones. Also, given that speech recognition was an up-and-coming thing among their target group, they could include this function in the remote, allowing users to control their devices by simply speaking to it.

tr-sq-52

tr-sq-52_0

Summarize the additional ideas on function design which the team brought up based on previous presentations. Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

Project Manager first announced that their product was only going to be a TV remote instead of a multifunctional one, and that the yellow colour and the slogan of their company should be included in their design. Their target group should be people of all ages with little to no technical literacy. The specific functions of their remote should include sending messages to the TV, lost-and-found assistance, and speech recognition. A menu button could be designed to cover all various additional functions.

tr-sq-53

tr-sq-53_0

In the discussion of function design, how could the team realize the lost-and-found function of their remote? Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

Industrial Designer suggested that the remote could be attached to a charger base, and the lost remote would beep if a button on the base was pushed. This might add to their costs, and would require a rechargeable battery for the remote. Project Manager later proposed that the speech recognition could be part of the lost-and-found device. This would allow the remote to beep when hearing a certain phrase.

tr-sq-54

tr-sq-54_0

What did the team decide on designing buttons for the remote? Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

User Interface first asked whether they could possibly leave out the number buttons, but this proposal was turned down by others. They simplified the buttons to on-off, volume, mute, channel up/down, and the numbers 0-9. For more advanced functions, Project Manager suggested an additional one-for-all menu button that would allow the user to pull up various options on the TV screen. The channel and volume buttons could be used for navigating the menu page.

tr-gq-55

tr-gq-55_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: Okay. Um welcome to our second meeting. This is the functional design meeting. And I hope you all had a good individual working time. Okay, let's get started. Okay, here's the agenda for the meeting. After the opening um I am going to fulfil the role of secretary, take the meeting minutes. And we're gonna have three presentations, one from each of you. Then we're gonna discuss some new project requirements. Um gonna come to a decision on the functions of the remote control. And then we're gonna close up the meeting. And we're gonna do this all in about forty minutes. {gap} Okay. First I want to discuss the goals of this meeting. First we need to determine the user requirements and the question that we can ask ourselves is what needs and desires are to be fulfilled by this remote control. And then we're going to determine the technical functions, what is the effect of the apparatus, what actually is it supposed to do, what do people pick up the remote and use it for. And then lastly we're going to determine its working design, how exactly will it perform its functions, that's the whole technical side of {disfmarker}'Kay I'll just give you a minute,'cause it looks like you're making some notes. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Oh, well let's go ahead and, User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {gap} back, previous. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So what I wanna do right now is hear from all three of you, on your research that you just did. Who would like to start us off?'Kay. User Interface: I don't mind going first. Project Manager: Okay. Um do you have a PowerPoint or no? User Interface: Yeah, it's in the {disfmarker} should be in the m Project. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Do you want us to do our PowerPoints now or {disfmarker} User Interface: You know you could you could do it yourself actually. Project Manager: Oh. Industrial Designer: Did you send it? Project Manager: Save it in the project documents. User Interface: Put it in Project Documents, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: yeah. Project Manager: Mm-mm-mm. This one? User Interface: Sure. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Okay. Great. User Interface: Okay. Um well, the function {vocalsound} of a remote control, as what uh we've been informed, is basically to send messages to the television set, for example, switch it on, switch it off, go to this channel, go to channel nine, turn the volume up, etcetera. Um some of the considerations is just um for example the what it needs to include it's the numbers, you know, zero to nine, so you can move to a channel, the power button on slash off, the channel going up and down, volume going up and down, and then mute, a mute function. And then functions for V_H_S_, D_V_D_, for example, play, rewind, fast-forward, stop, pause, enter. And enter would be for like, you know, the menus. {vocalsound} And then other menus for D_V_ as well as T_V_, whether that means like um we can go and decide the brightness of the screen, things like that, all the more complicated functions of menus. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: And we can decide if that's what we want, {gap}, um if we want to include that on the remote, if that's something that would stay on the T_V_ itself, for example. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. User Interface: These are two examples. Um and you can see on the left, it's got a lot more buttons, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I don't know if you can read it, but it says, step, go to, freeze, um slow, repeat, program, mute, and so those are some of the buttons and so it gives you an idea of s one example. And then on the right, it's a lot more simpler, it's got volume, it's got the play the like circle set, which is play, rewind, but it's also what is {disfmarker} fast-forward is also like next on a menu. So you have functions that are d uh duplicating. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: And you have a mute button and then the numbers and the eject, and the power button. So that gives you two different kinds, a more complex and more simple version. Okay. Project Manager: Ready. User Interface: And then lastly, it's just the questions that we want to consider like what functions do we want it to include, and how simple, complex it should be? And what functions it needs to complete. Uh, what are needed to complete insulation process,'cause, you know, that's something that also has to be considered and it's gonna be hopefully a one-time thing, when you set it up it should be set to go, but we have to include the functions that can allow it to set up i in the first place. Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: So that's it. Project Manager: Alright. Very good presentation. Thank you. You speak with such authority on the matter. User Interface: Mm. Left. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Who would like to um follow that one up? Now, that we've discussed {disfmarker} Marketing: I can go. Project Manager: Okay. Do you want me to run it or you wanna {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, you should run it. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Functional requirements. Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm yes. Project Manager:'Kay. Alright. Now we have Courtney with the functional requirements. Marketing: Yes, okay so we tested a hundred subjects in our lab, and we just we watched them and we also made them fill out a questionnaire, and we found that the {vocalsound} users are not typically happy with current remote controls. Seventy five percent think they're ugly. Eighty percent want {disfmarker} they've {disfmarker} are willing to spend more, which is good news for us um if we make it look fancier, and basically w we just need something that really I mean there's some other points up there, but they {disfmarker} it needs to be snazzy and it {disfmarker} but yet simple. User Interface: {gap} Wait. Marketing: So that's really what we need to do. And we need we need it to be simple, yet it needs to be high-tech looking. So {disfmarker} User Interface: And that meaning what? Marketing: Like {disfmarker} They like I guess use the buttons a lot. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: I don't know. It's from my uh research. Project Manager: Okay, what do you m User Interface: Right. Marketing: My team wasn't very clear. Project Manager: Oh, I'm sorry. User Interface: Only use ten percent of the buttons. Project Manager: What do you mean by um the current remote controls do not match well with the operating behaviour of the user, like they have to press the buttons. Marketing: {vocalsound} That's okay. I I think it's like the engineering versus user, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: whereas like the engineering she showed that the engineering ones are more complex Project Manager: Oh, right. Marketing: and users don't really need all of the buttons that are contained on there, because they only use ten percent of the buttons really. Project Manager: The buttons. Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Industrial Designer: We only use ten per cent of our brains. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: Good point. Project Manager: It works. Marketing: It's a necessary evil. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Ready for the next slide? Marketing: Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} And so people say that they typically lose it, as you yourself know, because you probably lose your remote control all the time, Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: much like any small appliance like a cellphone, User Interface: Lost. Marketing: and they {disfmarker} we need something simple, because most people, well thirty four percent say that it's just too much time to learn how to use a new one, and we don't want to go {disfmarker} we don't want to vary too far from the normal standard remote, User Interface: S Marketing: but I mean they do need to be able to identify it, and R_S_I_, I'm not very sure what that is. Project Manager: It's okay. It's very important. {vocalsound} Marketing: Yes, it is important for the remote control world. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Wait, is that like your {disfmarker} ergonomics like your hand movements or something? Marketing: Sh Project Manager: Could be, yeah. Marketing: Uh possibly. Industrial Designer: Do we really need t to provide more information on what R_S_I_ is? User Interface: Like {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: Uh yeah, that's what my web site said, I User Interface: Channel, volume, power. Project Manager: I think that's a pretty good guess though. Marketing: don't know. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah, I would assume so. User Interface: It's like if you're holding it {disfmarker} Marketing: I think we're supposed to know it as remote control experts. Project Manager: Yeah. It's okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} But also s so the channel, the volume and the power buttons are the most important on our company website you can find like the specific statistics concerning to how much each button is used, but those are the definitely the top ones. Project Manager: Okay. Next slide? Marketing: Yes. And so personally I think that we need a modern eye-catching design, but it it really needs to be simple. So saying from y your slide, your presentation, the engineering versus the user-specified remotes, I think that we should go with something that's more user-friendly. Project Manager: User-friendly. Marketing: Where the engineering ones, the boxes, tend to make it look more complicated than it really is. Um the functionality of the product really needs to be considered as to like what type of buttons do we really need on it. And it needs to be open to a wide range of consumers, so even though we need a small number of buttons, we also need to take in {disfmarker} like are most people going to be using it for a D_V_D_ player, a TiVo, what what exactly are we using it for, as well as the age range. So we need a hip, but not a corny marketing scheme for promoting our product. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: And also we found {disfmarker} our team found that speech recognition is {disfmarker} it's like an up-and-coming thing they really {disfmarker} consumers are really interested in it, and since our findings found that people are willing to pay more money for a remote for it to be more high-class we could consider it. Project Manager: And so just to {disfmarker} just to clarify by speech recognition you mean they would say, channel five, and the thing would go to channel five? Marketing: I guess so, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {gap} to just say, where are you, and thing beeps, you know. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Oh, that'd be lovely. Marketing: Yeah, I guess we can interpret it like, we can just try out different types of speech recognition within our remote programme. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Didn't they {disfmarker} um didn't our rival companies manufacture a remote that you would press the button on the T_V_ and it would {disfmarker} the remote would beep so if you have lost it {disfmarker} User Interface: It's kinda like what the remote phone used to do. Project Manager: Mm. Oh, yeah, that's true. User Interface: You know like go to the base. Project Manager: We could definitely include that if we wanted to. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: If it's within our price. Okay. Are we ready for our last presentation, Amber? Industrial Designer: Yeah, I'm just trying to move it. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. I think it should be there, working design. User Interface: Working design. Project Manager: There we go. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager:'Kay. Industrial Designer:'Kay. Uh I didn't get a chance to complete this one,'cause some of the tools that I was given were frustrating. Project Manager: Oh my bad. {vocalsound} Marketing: Oh that's fine. Industrial Designer: Uh okay, so method method of our design, I think I just start listing th some of the things that we actually need to put into this. User Interface: Help me. Industrial Designer: We need a power source, we're gonna need a smart chip if we're gonna make it multi-functional. Um extra functions will probably need an additional chip. Either that or the smart chip will have to be extremely smart. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: What exactly is a smart chip? Industrial Designer: Usually a smart chip is just a chip that's been programmed and designed so that it can complete a fair range of functions. User Interface: Well, how much extra would the additional chip be? Is that gonna push us over our production costs? Industrial Designer: I wouldn't think so,'cause we could probably get it from like, in bulk, from a a newer company. And they tend to sell their chips pretty cheap. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay. Ready? Industrial Designer: Um yep, nothing here. Project Manager: That's okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um power source, I figured, batteries,'cause they're easily available. Typically a remote has either two double A_s or four triple A_s, sometimes three. Uh it really kinda depends on the size of the actual remote itself. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Um a large on-off button, {vocalsound} demographically we're moving towards an older generation of people, so a large on-off button would probably be good. User Interface: {vocalsound} {gap} Project Manager: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Selection button for various entertainment devices, so you want something that will permit you to select the D_V_D_ player or the T_V_ or the stereo system. Um smart chip that perverts {disfmarker} uh that permits, sorry, universal application again, something that'll allow us to skip over between devices, and that's kinda it. Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: Uh this is my fifty second design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Power source over here. We're gonna have a switch obviously between the power source and the rest of it, and you're gonna need the switch. Um extra bulb could just be for flashiness, um subcomponent which would be like a way of diverting the power to different parts of the the device. Um the chip and of course the infra-red bulb, so it can communicate with the various devices that it needs to talk to. Marketing: So what exactly we are looking at, is this like the front of the remote? Industrial Designer: This is just like a rough schematic. Project Manager: So this would be the front? Industrial Designer: So this is the internal workings. Project Manager: So the red would be the front of the remote though, right? Marketing: Oh okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Yeah, that's gonna be what's communicating with the T_V_, but the other bulb, I think, is good to just to indicate, I'm doing something, it's sort of like a reassurance. Project Manager: The l {vocalsound} the light up kind of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah, so you don't have to stare at that infra-red, Marketing: Like that we know the battery's working. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause you know when the battery starts dying in your remote currently, you have to actually stare at that bulb and go, okay, when I push this button, is it working? Project Manager: Hmm. It'd probably be lighting up the key too, Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: We can skip that whole thing. Project Manager: right? Industrial Designer: Yep. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: So you can put it in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: The buttons. Marketing: Yeah, and that's good. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: We should make it glow in the dark. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, definitely.'Kay nex R Ready? Industrial Designer: Yeah, that's it. Project Manager:'Kay, any p'Kay? User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mm'kay. Project Manager: Anything you wanna add for personal preferences though, you f you said already that we needed a large on-off button, you think. Anything else? Industrial Designer: I think that that's a good idea, because you know that's one of the most important buttons. User Interface: Just {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Well, should it be larger buttons in general, you know like uh the examples that I had, they were swi quite small. So should we try and go for something that has l larger buttons? Marketing: I think we should. Like I think that would be in a as in {disfmarker} like in {disfmarker} for the design, sorry, um. I think we should definitely go with buttons that don't look like a normal remote,'cause most remotes have small square buttons, Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: I think we should do something like maybe bigger and round like bubbles. User Interface: Ovals. Yeah, yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Okay, let's talk about all of our {disfmarker} We'll come to decision later about all the components that we need to include, let's um wrap up this one, and {vocalsound} I'm gonna go back to my PowerPoint,'cause we need to discuss the new project requirements which you might've already seen flashed up on the screen a bit earlier. {vocalsound} Wait, come back. Alright. Sorry, let's go through this. Alright. Here we go. New product requirements. First it's only going to be a T_V_ remote. We're trying not to over-complicate things. So no D_V_D_, no TiVo, no stereo. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: It's not gonna be multi-functional. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: Hey. And we th need to promote our company more, so we need to somehow include our colour and our company slogan on the remote. We're trying to get our name out there in the world. Okay. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: And you know what teletext is? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} in States we don't have it, but um it's like they just have this channel where just has news and weather, kind of sports, User Interface: I know. Marketing: What is it? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: it's very um bland looking, it's just text on the screen, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: not even {disfmarker} User Interface: it's like black, black and white kind of {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, just black with just text. Marketing: Like running along the bottom? Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: You can also get the kind of the T_V_ guide so {disfmarker} User Interface: It'll give you the sports. Marketing: Wait, is it like the Weather Channel where it's got like the ticker running on the bottom or something? Project Manager: Kind of. User Interface: Except the entire screen. Project Manager: Yeah it's the whole screen. Industrial Designer: It's the entire screen is just running information at random. Project Manager: So anyway {disfmarker} User Interface: You can pick sports, you can pick the news, you entertainment, Industrial Designer: Seemingly. User Interface: you know it's like {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right. Marketing: So it's like a separate channel from like what you're watching? Project Manager: Right. But it's becoming out-dated now, because of the Internet. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Nobody needs to go to the teletext channel to check the news, {vocalsound} and we have twenty four hour news channels now too, so {disfmarker} Those are our new product requirements. Alright. Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Okay. Industrial Designer: So, do we have to include the company colour within that? Project Manager: Yes. It's part of the logo. Okay. User Interface: Company colour being yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: What we're going to do right now is come to some decisions, definitive that we can all agree on, about um the target group and the functions and just definite things that we need to do and then we'll close up the meeting. So. Alright. {gap} Whatever. Okay. So our target group is {disfmarker} You mentioned um older people? Would it just be universal for everyone, you think? User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Because I think even if something has large buttons, as long as they are not childishly large, like even technically {disfmarker} User Interface: It's gonna make it nicer. Yeah. Project Manager: non-technically challenged people are gonna use it. I mean they want something user-friendly, so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm well, even if we kept the regular standard size of remote, if we reduced the buttons down to the ones that people are saying that they use the most often and a couple extra, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer:'cause they're saying they only use ten per cent of them, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: then we should be able to accommodate fairly decent sized buttons. Project Manager: Okay, so we want um for our target group would we say, I mean, young and old, all age ranges, all um, not kids obviously, right? Or kids? Marketing: No, kids need to know how to use a remote, I would think. Industrial Designer: Most of them will intuitively pick it up though. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: They gotta change between Disney Channel, Cartoon Network. Project Manager: Okay, so we're going to go anywhere from kids to adult in the age range {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, I think we need it all. Project Manager: Um what about technic technical um specifications, like how how technically literate are these people who are going to be using our remote? Industrial Designer: {gap} Marketing: Um I would say we should say dumber than the average person. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: We should go for the lowest denominator. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Right, okay. So so they need no technical experience to operate {disfmarker} User Interface: High school educated. Industrial Designer: {gap} how'bout little to no, because there is no way that you are gonna be able to make it no. Project Manager: Okay. And we also need to determine the specific functions of this, just to get it all out on paper. So we said it needs to send messages to the T_V_, needs to change the channel, turn on and off, just basic simple stuff like this. So if you have something just say it and we'll add it to my meeting minutes. User Interface: Well it's channel, on-off button, volume, mute. Project Manager: Mm-hmm, volume. Marketing: And channel. Yeah. Those are the most important ones. Project Manager: Right. And we wanna keep um {disfmarker} I'll make a note here that we wanna keep the number of buttons down. Correct, because people only use ten percent. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Hey, what else? User Interface: Um. Project Manager: Um. Industrial Designer: Do we want this thing to be able to be found easily? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think so. What do you {disfmarker} Marketing: Sure, yeah. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: A finding kind of device or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: And Marketing: I need {disfmarker} we we need a like homing device. Project Manager: Yeah, ho homing device. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: like if this is gonna get lost underneath the coach, how are we going to accommodate the quick ability to find it? User Interface: Oh right yeah okay. Project Manager: Mm'kay. User Interface: Tracking. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Because people really are looking for a remote that's more high-tech. Project Manager: Right. Industrial Designer: What if we gave it a charger? And on the charger, just like a phone, like you get a portable phone and it's got a charger, and if you d leave your phone somewhere, you push the button to find it, and it finds th the phone beeps for you. User Interface: But you got a base. Marketing: Do you think people'll really go for that though? Industrial Designer: It's useful for the remote phone. Marketing: Because {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Would that add to our costs at all, I wonder? Marketing: I would think so, because you'd have to develop a base. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Well, if you have the base, you could start putting in a charger and then you have a different kind of battery. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Rechargeable batteries are cheaper usually. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. I I think we can make a decision about that later. Uh we'll still put that as a point that we need to discuss. So that would include battery source {disfmarker} Power source rather. Is it going to have a charger, or is it going to be run strictly off batteries? And we also need to deal with the issue you mentioned of speech recognition, if we want that. Marketing: Right. User Interface: Well, then we could {disfmarker} Marketing: Do w User Interface: If we have the speech recognition then we can start aiming at a like another kind of more handicapped disabled uh demo demographic. Project Manager: Mm. Marketing: Well, th there's the people who desire speech recognition, there's the different demog demographics have different desires, I don't know if you guys ge Project Manager: You could um {disfmarker} we could hook it up. Marketing: It wouldn't copy onto the the thing'cause it's black, Project Manager: Oh. Marketing: but all the different age groups have different desires for speech recognition. So {vocalsound} basically older people don't really care. User Interface: {gap} Marketing: It's really the people twenty five to thirty five. I feel those are the people that really watch a lot of T_V_ though. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: They're the ones that get addicted to soap operas and Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And if and if we introduced it when they're this age, they're going to probably always buy a remote that has {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Marketing: just sitcoms and stuff. Right. User Interface: Well, then then do you put the voice recognition {disfmarker} do you put the r like receiver on the actual television, in the base, or in the actual remote, Marketing: So {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause then you've already got remote in your hand, why you just gonna speak to the remote, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: whereas if you just speak in general and you don't have to have the remote in your hand and like talk at it. Project Manager: Yeah. {gap} and the speech recognition could be part of the lost and found device, too. If we said, find remote, locate remote, or something. Marketing: Right. Project Manager: A certain phrase then it could beep. I dunno. Just throwing it out there. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Well {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Still {gap} fifteen minutes. Project Manager: Okay, anything else we wanna discuss? User Interface: Um. Well, do we wanna include the numbers like zero through nine? Can we conceive of leaving them out? Project Manager: Um. Marketing: Wait, on the remote itself? Project Manager: {gap} User Interface: Yeah, like you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, zero. Project Manager: How how, Marketing: Well, we definitely need those. Project Manager: yeah, how would you leave those out? Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: Well, I don't know, I mean, if you can {gap} like well {disfmarker} Project Manager: Unless you could say the channel. User Interface: I don't know, if there's just a way of leaving them out? Industrial Designer: I think people would find that too foreign. Project Manager: Yeah, that's true. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also remember that in this day in age we need, you know, like a hundred button, too. Marketing: You definitely need {disfmarker} Project Manager: I used to have a remote that did not even go up past like fifty. {vocalsound} So I couldn't {disfmarker} whenever I got cable, I had to get a new T_V_. Industrial Designer: It's when we get satellite. Project Manager: Mm. {gap} get your own remote, or digital cable. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager:'Kay. Um. I guess, we're gonna discuss the project financing later, making sure that we can fit all of the stuff that we want to on our budget. Um. Industrial Designer: Yeah,'cause I don't have any material pricing information available to me at the moment, so {disfmarker} Project Manager:'Kay. And don't forget we need to include the colour of our company and the logo. User Interface: The colour being yellow? Marketing: Wait. Project Manager: I'm guessing. And the R_R_. User Interface: And how do we {disfmarker} Marketing: I feel like a ye I feel like a yellow one would be too garish. Industrial Designer: R_ the double R_. Project Manager: We could just have the logo in yellow, User Interface: Can't make it entirely {disfmarker} Project Manager: or maybe a yellow light for the keys. Industrial Designer: Or is the l Marketing: Or put like stripes, oh yeah, yellow lights. Industrial Designer: Yeah, {vocalsound} yellow could be and it could {disfmarker} doesn't have to be huge. User Interface: Well if you have like a {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Hang on. If you have this sort of strip kind of down at the bottom {gap} the base of it, just like yellow with the R_R_. Project Manager: Right. So we've simplified, we don't need all those um play, fast-forward, rewind, User Interface: Right, yeah. Project Manager: or no menu buttons. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: So we've pretty much pared it down to on-off, volume, mute, channel up and down, um the numbers {disfmarker} Yeah. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um can we go back to {disfmarker} I'm gonna look really quickly back at those User Interface: Two examples. Project Manager: examples and see if there is anything. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Which one is yours, technical functions or functional requirement? User Interface: Oh, it's a {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Yeah, audi audio settings and screen settings, we need those like audio settings mono, stereo, pitch, screen settings like brightness, colour, or do we just want that accessed accessed from the television itself? Project Manager: The T_V_. I think that that's fine just for the T_V_. I mean how often does the average user need to do that kind of stuff? User Interface: Well, the other option is sort of like down at the bottom, like farther away, you just have this sort of box inset where it's like the buttons that you don't use as much, but occasionally you will use. Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: and so it's like {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah,'cause we need to {disfmarker} we definitely need to have buttons for like sub-titles and things like that. It's'cause the foreign film market is expanding and stuff, and like on television like I know f k living in Los Angeles it's tons of Spanish network television if it has English sub-titles it's definitely helpful. Project Manager: Couldn't we do that all through one button, something, a menu button, that pops up with a menu on the T_V_ that says, you know, audio, video, whatever, language, User Interface: I don't {disfmarker} well, I don't know. Project Manager: you know? User Interface: Right. Marketing: So we need up, down, and side-to-side buttons. Project Manager: For the menus. User Interface: Well, that could be {disfmarker} No you could just double up with like the channel or the volume buttons. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: That's true. User Interface: Channel is just up and down. Marketing: Yeah, okay. Okay, yeah. User Interface: And then add a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Something that looks mayb you know. Marketing: Such as, yeah, the one the one over there on the left the engineering centred one. Project Manager: Y right, right right right. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: That one? User Interface: So we just have it like {disfmarker} add a menu button then for the various things needed, Project Manager: Right. User Interface: including v voice recognition if we have any like settings for voice recognition now Project Manager: In the middle perhaps. User Interface: included in the menu. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Ooh, I just got an idea for a design. Project Manager: {gap} good. Anybody have anything else they'd like to bring up in this meeting? Industrial Designer: I had something, but I forgot. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {gap} get out of here. Let's go back to the meeting closure then and see what we need to do next. Mm. Alright. After this meeting we're gonna be sent a questionnaire and summary again which we need to reply to that e-mail. And then we're gonna have lunch break. And after lunch thirty minutes of individual work time. Um I'm gonna put the minutes {disfmarker} I put the minutes for the first meeting already in the project documents folder, if you'd like to review them. And I'm gonna type up the minutes for this one as well. Um here's what we're each going to do. The I_D_ is going to work on the components concept, um U_I_D_ the user interface concept, and you're going to do some trend watching.'Kay. Specific instructions will be sent to you by your personal coach. And if anybody has anything they would like to add? No? Okay, well, this meeting is officially over. Thank you all.

This was the functional design meeting, where the team discussed what functions should be included in the remote and how they should be carried out. User Interface gave a presentation on the design of the remote, offering a complex version and a simple one. Marketing followed with a presentation on the functional requirements of the remote, pointing out that the remote should be both high-tech looking and user-friendly, preferably with fewer buttons, a lost-and-found function and speech recognition. Industrial Designer then presented the working design for the remote, including its power source, chips and the component layout. The team then went into a further in-depth discussion, dealing with the specific points raised in the above presentations. After everyone had shared their ideas, Project Manager closed the meeting by distributing new tasks among the team members for them to work on until their next meeting.

tr-sq-56

tr-sq-56_0

Summarize the discussion about financial targets of the new remote control project. User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

The remote control would be priced at 25 Euros, produced at the cost of 12. 5 Euros. Since the company has international market range, at least 2 million units would have to be sold to meet the company's profit goals of 50 million Euros.

tr-sq-57

tr-sq-57_0

What did the group discuss about new remote control features? User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

User Interface believed the most important function is to switch channels, and so it would be better to keep the remote control as basic as possible. Marketing proposed that the remote control had to be multi-purpose to be competitive among current products. Project Manager agreed to do something special on the product, but PM also pointed out being user-friendly was also of importance.

tr-sq-58

tr-sq-58_0

What did Project Manager think about new remote control features proposed by Marketing? User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

Marketing put forward innovative ideas including using radio waves and bluetooth. In the proposal, some potential problems about high cost and being limited to marketing aspects had also been mentioned by Marketing. Based on this, PM agreed that those ideas could help the product to be special and competitive, but PM also pinpointed that such a product required strong support of high technology. Besides, being user-friendly should not be ignored.

tr-sq-59

tr-sq-59_0

What did Marketing recommend to do and why when discussing new useful features of the new remote control? User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

Marketing recommended developing a multi-purpose remote control because most of the remote controls on the market were made just for one purpose. Besides, Marketing suggested to use some other technology, such as radio waves and bluetooth, than infrared because it could be easily affected by obstacles. Thirdly, a nice added feature was to inform users of the coming programmes. Marketing conceived a high-tech remote control to be competitive among other products.

tr-sq-60

tr-sq-60_0

What did the group plan to discuss for the next meeting? User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

Project Manager gave each team member different tasks. Project Manager asked Industrial Designer to look at the working design, User Interface to work on the technical functions and Marketing to be responsible for user requirements. User Interface recommended to achieve some agreement on whether to use the new remote control for multiple systems, and User Interface also asked whether to use a text screen or bluetooth. Besides, Project Manager also demanded that everyone in the group should individually ponder the most important thing in this project from their own perspective.

tr-gq-61

tr-gq-61_0

Summarize the whole meeting. User Interface: Hi. Industrial Designer: Hi. Project Manager: Hello. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh. Project Manager: Good morning. User Interface: Good morning. Industrial Designer: Morning. Marketing: Good morning. Project Manager: Uh before I start with the with the meeting I have a few things to tell you about the the setting we're in, uh because we're uh being watched by uh Big Brother. So um {disfmarker} Marketing: By Big Brother? Project Manager: Yeah. {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: This uh {disfmarker} These are cameras, so are these. This thing uh that looks like a pie, Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: are actually all microphones. Marketing: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: So you must be careful with uh with uh all this. And uh as I can see you uh you have placed your laptops uh exactly on the place where it must be. And that has to do with the camera settings, so we don't have our uh laptops in front of the cameras. Marketing: Of our faces. Project Manager: And {disfmarker} Indeed. So they can see our faces. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Welcome at the kick-off meeting. My name is uh Danny Wolfs. {vocalsound} Uh this is the agenda for today. Uh first a little opening. Uh I will introduce myself, uh and uh I think it's very uh good to introduce uh yourself. Uh then uh a little bit of acquaintance, acquaintance to uh to to ourselves. So uh we get to know each other. Uh that will be done uh with a tool training from the he these two uh smart boards. Then the project plan. What we're going to do, and how we're going to do it. Uh and discussion about that and a little closing at the end. {vocalsound} Okay uh, my name is uh Danny Wolfs. I'm the Project Manager. What's your name? User Interface: I'm Juergen Toffs. I'm the User Interface Designer. Project Manager: User interface, okay. Industrial Designer: Hi, my name's uh {gap}. I'm the Industrial Designer. Project Manager: Industrial, yes. Marketing: I'm uh Tim {gap}. Um my function is the Marketing Expert. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. First a little about the project aim. Uh the the the aim is to make a new remote control. Uh maybe you have read uh read the website. It's a very uh, yeah, very uh ambitious uh company. They uh they wanna do something else. I w Uh there must be a new remote control. Uh first of all uh it must be original, uh and trendy. That's two things really uh close to each other. But at the same time uh user-friendly. And they have uh {disfmarker} Yeah, that's uh very important uh for them. Uh there are three stages. There is a functional design. So uh what are we going uh to uh to do? What are we going to uh uh make f uh kind of functions in the remote? And why are we going to do it? Then the conceptual design. How are going to do it? {vocalsound} And that's uh really global. Uh because at the detailed design, how, part two, uh we go uh to dig in uh really about how the the te the technical of {disfmarker} If it's uh it's possible technical-wise. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh each stage is uh {vocalsound} uh is broken up in two uh two stages, individual work and a meeting. So it's uh it's very straightforward. {vocalsound} Okay, the tool training. We have two smart boards. {vocalsound} This one is for the presentations, the PowerPoint presentations or the Word presentation of whatever you uh you had. Uh and this is uh only for uh drawing. So uh we uh must let it uh stand on this uh this programme. {vocalsound} This is called a smart board Marketing: {vocalsound} Speaks for itself. Project Manager: thing uh {disfmarker} Yeah, it speaks for itself. Um and as you uh may have heard, the documents in the shared folder uh can be uh showed on this screen. Not in y the the My Documents. So if you wanna show something, put it in the shared folder. {vocalsound} Uh {disfmarker} This uh is {gap} very straightforward, with the save, the print, the undo, the blank, the select, the pen. Well, I don't uh gonna explain it all, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: because I think you know uh how it works. Um we must not forget uh everything we draw on here, uh all must be saved. We we may not delete anything. So uh if you have uh drawn something, save it. Never delete it. That's a very important uh thing. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Uh little uh little {vocalsound} kinda exercise to uh know each other. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} At uh the white board on the left. Every uh every one of us uh must draw our favourite animal, Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} and uh tell uh tell us why we uh had uh chosen that animal. Uh important is that we use different colours, {vocalsound} and uh different pen widths. Widths. Widths. Marketing: I have a question. Project Manager: Yes? Marketing: Um this exercise, um did the company board tell you to do it, Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: or uh did you just make it up yourself? Project Manager: No no no. It's uh it's uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} I I I must do it. Marketing: It's part of the introduction, Project Manager: Yeah, yeah, yeah.'Cause we uh really don't know each other, Marketing: okay. Project Manager: and uh it's kinda new. So getting used to each other, we can uh have a little fun then, before we uh dig in really to the hard stuff. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That kind of thing. Would you start with drawing your uh favourite animal? Marketing: Um, yeah. I don't know really how it works. But maybe you can show us first? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Drawing goes with uh this thing. Do not touch your hand on uh this little uh thingy here. That's uh important. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So hold it uh like this. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: You g you get electrocuted or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah, kinda. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So, {vocalsound} um {disfmarker} You must p p uh push a little uh {disfmarker} Good. Because {disfmarker} And uh wait uh wait a few seconds. It's not uh fully real-time, so uh watch it. User Interface: Ach. {gap} Project Manager: Oh yeah. Well I'm gonna paint in the red. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Oh. User Interface: Ooph. Project Manager: That's the background colour. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, undo. Um {disfmarker} The pen? No. One minute please. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, that's the one. Well, five. Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} My favourite animal huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's like Pictionary? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, you can guess what it is. Marketing: The the one who says it first {vocalsound} gets a raise. Project Manager: {vocalsound} May uh paint uh next. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: It's a pork? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} No, it's not an orc. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You don't see it uh at the ears? Marketing: Mm yeah, I have it at home. {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an orc at home? User Interface: Very artistic. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Thank you. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So it's a cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: What's it called? Project Manager: Simba.'Cause uh we have a cat at home Marketing: Ah. Project Manager: and he's called Simba.'Cause he looks like the uh the the lion from The Lion King. User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Miniature size? Project Manager: So we uh found it kinda cool to uh name it after a lion. Marketing: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: He's happy with us, so uh he's smiling. User Interface: Wow. He does have body uh {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Huh. Project Manager: No, only the face. Because we have we have twen twenty five minutes. So we uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay. We have to speed up. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Remember you use uh different colours, and different pen widths. Project Manager: Yeah. Okay, who wants to go next? Marketing: I {disfmarker} Okay. Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So choose a colour, choose a pen width and draw a {disfmarker} User Interface: You don't have to change the colour and the pen width during uh the drawing. Marketing: Save it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or {disfmarker} Marketing: You have to save it. Project Manager: Save it, okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I've done it. New?'Kay. User Interface: You have to draw uh push hard on the pen or uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Mm uh {disfmarker} Not really. Project Manager: Kind of firm touch. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: That one. User Interface: Oh. Uh hmm. Marketing: Yeah? Okay. Open. Which one is it? Smart board? Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. And now? Okay. Okay, thanks.'Kay, I've speed up.'Kay, that's fine. Line width. Industrial Designer: By the way, why was your cat uh red? Project Manager: Because uh my cat is red uh at home. User Interface: Oh. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: And I have red hair, so uh must be red. User Interface: It's a very bloody cat. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, yeah, sure. User Interface: It's a frog. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No, it's a turtle. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Uh it's an apple. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's not an apple. Industrial Designer: Must be a dog. {vocalsound} User Interface: A dog? {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Hmm. Colour. {vocalsound} Something like this. Smaller. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Huh? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Oh, it is a turtle. Project Manager: It is a turtle. Why a turtle? Why? Tim? Marketing: Um {disfmarker}'Cause I liked Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Project Manager: {vocalsound} You watched it a lot? User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Uh? Project Manager: You watched it a lot? User Interface: It's uh inside its shell. You'll be uh finished sooner. Marketing: No, it's uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: It's a scared turtle. Marketing: No no. {vocalsound} It's coming up. Mm. Uh. User Interface: Wow. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, Tim. Thank you. {vocalsound} Marketing: Something like this. {vocalsound} Okay, you know {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Very artistic. Project Manager: Jurgen, you want to go next? User Interface: Yes {gap}. Okay. Wha Thank you. Marketing: Yeah? Here you go. User Interface: Yeah. Um {disfmarker} Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: How did it work? Project Manager: Format? And then you have the the current colour, User Interface: Performance? Project Manager: you can change. So no red or green. User Interface: And a pen? Project Manager: And uh line uh width. I had five. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Tim had {disfmarker} Uh Tim, what kinda line width did you have? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh the big lines were like nine. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. It's a dog. User Interface: Well, very good. {vocalsound} I just uh thought I'd pick the easiest one. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Why a dog? You have a dog at home? User Interface: Well, we had a dog, a few years ago. Project Manager: Had a dog? Marketing: Uh, it's p Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: And and it, {gap} yeah, when it died we didn't get a new one or something. Project Manager: Ah. User Interface: But uh {disfmarker} Marketing: It's pretty good uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: You have an artistic uh inner middle. Marketing: {gap} {vocalsound} An artist. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh a Graphical User Designer, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: Hey. Marketing: Think you uh picked the wrong uh function. Wrong job. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Oh. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: No. Can work together. Ah colour. Project Manager: So I think you can see it's real uh really a easy programme to use. Not difficult at all. Marketing: Wha User Interface: {vocalsound} Well, Project Manager: Okay, User Interface: it's okay {gap}. Project Manager: thank you. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} That's enough, User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: thanks. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Janus? The last one? Industrial Designer: Yeah, sure. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh thanks. Marketing: I wonder. Project Manager: Yeah. After a cat, a turtle and a dog. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think he's gonna draw an elephant. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I figure I should do something like that, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but I'm gonna do something much more difficult. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh-oh. User Interface: Uh-oh. Oh, he is the artistic {gap} design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: I'm gonna design a remote uh {vocalsound} remote control animal. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Remote control animal. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Exactly. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Oh. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Well with the interface, it might be easier to ha to draw here and display there uh. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: That that might be easier. But at the other hand, uh a pen like that is easy to hold in your hand, and {disfmarker} Project Manager: No. Marketing: I think it's easier to draw. Project Manager: Better to draw with a with {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. With a pen than with a mouse mouse. User Interface: Than on the, with {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, I m I mean like uh like on here, drawing drawing uh. And then displaying on screen, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: Mouth. Oh, okay. Yeah. W with this paper it's too mu too expensive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: But what is he uh? User Interface: Too expensive, yeah. Project Manager: Is it a rabbit? Industrial Designer: Yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Do you have a rabbit at home? Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No. Marketing: It's a rabbit with uh broken legs? {vocalsound} User Interface: A green rabbit. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} No. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is it a white rabbit f It's the white rabbit from The Matrix. Industrial Designer: Yeah, exactly. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, then yeah. User Interface: There, the g white green rabbit. Industrial Designer: So. User Interface: {vocalsound} He's a little bit stoned there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Uh I figured this is a pretty b good impression of a rabbit. Marketing: Yeah. It will do. Industrial Designer: Uh uh {disfmarker} Uh well. Project Manager: Okay. Finishing touch and then we're going further. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Project Manager? Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah? Industrial Designer: Where does the pen go? Just uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Have you been uh counting the time? Project Manager: Yeah, a little. {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay. Let's go on then. Project Manager: Well, I think the dog is the the most uh artistic. Industrial Designer: Uh I figured the rabbit was actually the most uh impressive. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Don't choose for youself. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Oh, sorry. {vocalsound} Project Manager: That's selfish. Okay, now we're gonna dig into the to the serious stuff. Marketing: It's pretty abstract. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the selling price for the remote will be uh twenty five Euro, and the production cost uh may not be more than uh twenty and a half Euro. So uh from my point of view, I don't think it's uh gonna be very uh very high tech, high definition, uh ultra modern uh kinda remote, for twelve uh fift uh twelve and a half Euro. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh the profit we must make with uh the new remote is uh fifty million Euro. So that's a lot. We have to sell uh a lot of uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah, how much is it? Marketing: Like how much? User Interface: Hundred million uh remotes or something? Project Manager: Uh I think uh w when the selling price is twenty five, uh uh you got two million, two million remotes. User Interface: Oh yeah. Industrial Designer: Twenty million. Two million, oh yeah, two million. Yeah. Project Manager: But our marketing range is uh, market range is international. So we have uh virtually the whole world we can sell uh we can sell our r remotes to. At least that uh countries which have uh a television. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} So now it's time uh for us to uh going uh to discuss a little uh things. You can think about uh experience with a remote control uh yourself, at home. What you think might be uh a useful uh new feature. What uh what can distinguish our new trendy remote control from all the others. Um so uh let's uh let's uh discuss a little. I'm gonna join you at the table. {vocalsound} Well what what's the most uh important thing at a remote control? User Interface: Um well I think the most important thing of a remote control is that you can switch channels. And my opinion is you should keep it as basic as possible. Uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So not a not a remote control who uh uh which can uh can be used for television and a D_V_D_ and radio and {disfmarker} Or just only {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. I think so. Uh but I have some points. Can I show them on the on the big screen? Maybe? Project Manager: If you have them on uh {disfmarker} I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah. Yeah, I can find {disfmarker} Uh. Project Manager: Okay. Oh, in case you want it {disfmarker} This is a dead kind of fly. Between the the the, yeah, the the uh {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Screen? Project Manager: Yeah, be The screens. Marketing: Okay. User Interface: Is it possible to open pen drawings in this uh on this screen? Project Manager: {vocalsound} No no no. Only {disfmarker} All the drawings go there, at the left uh {disfmarker} {gap} User Interface: Uh but um which {disfmarker} The ones we made on the {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh, that pen drawings. Uh no, I think uh when it is uh in Word and you have saved it in the Shared Documents folder, you can show it there. User Interface: Oh, only in Word, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: okay. Marketing: Okay, I have some uh points from marketing point of view. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Um just the standard thing li things like uh intuitive, uh small, fairly cheap. Uh it's pretty cheap, twenty five Euros. Uh brand independent. Um I think, it doesn't have to matter uh which brand your T_V_ or other thing is. Um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. Okay. Five minutes. Marketing: Five minutes? Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Okay, I'll wrap it up quickly. Um I personally think it has to be multi-purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Uh most of the remote c uh remote controls are uh just for one purpose. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: And uh by making it multi-purpose, it uh has a new feature, adds a new feature to the market, and distinguish from uh from current products. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Um maybe some other technology than infrared. Uh I rather find it very annoying um, like when someone is standing in front of the T_V_ then you can't switch it. Um {vocalsound} think about um sending it over radio waves or bluetooth. Project Manager: Okay. Okay. Marketing: That might be a little bit uh expensive. Um {disfmarker} And something like an L_C_D_ screen. User Interface: For what purpose? Marketing: Um uh like I said here um {disfmarker} Maybe it's easy. It's nice as an added feature feature, that um, {vocalsound} when you're on a certain channel, you can see on the L_C_D_ screen uh what programmes are coming up or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. So it be uh a multi-purpose uh very technically uh high uh Marketing: From my point of view, yeah. Project Manager: remote? Yeah, it must be really uh innovative, technical-wise? Marketing: Yeah, it has to be uh {disfmarker} Yeah, our company is very uh good in making new innovative uh things. Project Manager: Yeah. So yeah, I I agree with you. User Interface: {vocalsound} We {disfmarker} Marketing: So i i i i Project Manager: So we must focus on things who are really uh really add something to uh to {disfmarker} Marketing: To the current market. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Look, {vocalsound} you got some cheap uh remote controls there. They just uh {disfmarker} Yeah, you got a dozen of'em. Project Manager: No. Marketing: But when you enter a new market with a remote control and Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: uh wanna gain market share Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: you have to do something special, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But we have to keep an eye that it's {disfmarker} Uh at the beginning of such a project, it's it's it's very uh cool to talk about, well, this would be cool, that would be cool. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh but we must not uh lose uh sight of the the user uh uh friendly uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah, of course. User Interface: And and the price. {gap} Marketing: But it's {disfmarker} But but this is just from marketing uh aspect. Project Manager: Yeah okay. Yeah. Okay. Marketing: I don't know anything about user interface or {vocalsound} design. User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {gap} And that's because we have him. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And and him. {vocalsound} User Interface: And him. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay, uh next meeting will start in thirty minutes. So uh you uh will have uh individual actions where I presume uh will be some feedback, uh via the m the mail. Um {vocalsound} the the the Industrial uh Designer has to uh look at the working design. {vocalsound} Uh the User Interface Designer has to look at the technical functions. So that's the thing we uh discussed. User Interface: Yeah. Um one thing uh, Project Manager: Yeah? User Interface: we must first agree on uh what we're going to m going to make. Do we {disfmarker} Are we going to use um it it for multiple systems? Or uh {disfmarker} We should have some agreement on that before we {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. Um wha Marketing: {vocalsound} Mm uh I I don't think we have to be, we have to agree on that. Uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I figure we could get back to it on the next meeting actually. Marketing: I think th that's a pha Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Marketing: That's a phase further. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Marketing: Ju just uh make some mock-ups, some some general ideas. User Interface: Ah okay. Marketing: And and then we can plan {disfmarker} Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: We can plan further, I think. Project Manager: Yeah. But maybe, because uh you are working on the user requirements, you are working on the technical functions, we uh must uh have a little or kinda uh uh uh {disfmarker} How do you call it? Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Consensus on the, what we're gonna do. Project Manager: Uh a little plan on on what we're going to do. So you don't uh uh come up with the user requirements who don't fit the the the the technical functions at all. Some basic things we co we want to going to do. Uh I think that's well uh {disfmarker} Yeah. Will come in handy. Marketing: Mm yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: I don't know. You decide. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: You're the Project Manager. Project Manager: W {vocalsound} He says {disfmarker} User Interface: if the technical functions have to be designed, I I've gotta know for what kind of machines they will be. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Or do we use it a text screen? Or uh will it be with uh with bluetooth or {disfmarker} Project Manager: Well, th that's that's really a step further. But if you say uh {vocalsound} is it uh uh one way or multi-purpose, that's a {disfmarker} User Interface: Okay. Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh tha that's a same step further. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: Yeah, actually it is. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Why? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Then looking at individual components, Marketing: Uh. Industrial Designer: so that's actually a f step further. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: Yeah. Marketing: Like we all have a list of uh things that has to b that have to be in it, or how it has to be like. And then in the next meeting we decide Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, we can take it from there. Marketing: w what it's gonna be. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah, I agree uh, we can take it from there. Marketing: A And then you s then you can delete uh Industrial Designer: Or edit. Marketing: the o the obsolete uh details. Project Manager: Okay. So uh Marketing: I think. Project Manager: each individually i individually uh must think on what's uh at uh his point of view is the most important. And uh then we're going to fit uh all the pieces together the next meeting. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: I must finish off now, Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: so it's over. You uh will receive specific specific instructions uh by your personal coach. And I see you in uh thirty minutes. Thank you. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Okay, cheers. User Interface: Sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Be careful. Marketing: Damn. User Interface: Yes. Marketing: Success? {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. No. Come up.

Project Manager gave a brief introduction of the new remote control project for television sets. During team building, team members got to know each other by drawing their favorite animals with technical devices. When it came to the financial targets, Project Manager planned that the remote control would be priced at 25 Euros on the premise of the 12. 5-Euro production cost, and the profit is targeted at 50 million Euros. The market range would be international. Then, ideas about new technical features of the remote control were proposed, such as radio waves and bluetooth, in order to distinguish the product from current ones. Finally, some general arrangements for the next meeting about user requirements and technical functions were made by Project Manager and each team member was required to think on the most important thing from their own point of view.

tr-sq-62

tr-sq-62_0

Summarize the discussion about the current XML format to link up different components in data Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

C developed an XML format that links together utterances based on time tags, essentially creating a lattice. The XML format would be divided into many sections, each with its own ID and timeline tag. The XML format could be modified to deal with smaller linguistic units since that would only entail changing the timestamps. Despite being easy to use, the format was not efficient for smaller linguistic units, like phones. It would work for word units, at best.

tr-sq-63

tr-sq-63_0

What did F think about the current XML format to link up different components in data? Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

F was concerned about how the time labels would adjust to smaller phonetic units. F inquired if the time boundaries could be changed by propagating new information throughout the XML. F thought that they could configure different XML files to deal with different units, but it would lead to large file sizes.

tr-sq-64

tr-sq-64_0

What did A think about the current XML format to link up different components in data? Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

A had seen an example of this kind of XML format before. A thought that the time boundaries were nicely handled but believed that smaller linguistic units would drain too much memory. It was essentially like a lattice, in his opinion. Though, A did not seem too concerned with dealing with smaller linguistic units since the problem would not be encountered frequently.

tr-sq-65

tr-sq-65_0

Summarize the discussion about the disadvantages of ATLAS and other options Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

Since the team is familiar with Perl and a flat file format is easier, it was suggested that the cost of learning a new framework, like ATLAS, might be too high. It was suggested that ATLAS be used for the external file representation initially, and if it seems suitable, then it should be adopted in its entirety. P files were also discussed but the problem with them was that they could still get pretty big.

tr-sq-66

tr-sq-66_0

What did C think about the disadvantages of ATLAS and other options? Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

C thought that other options have a big learning curve, which should be taken into account, and that a flat format works well. A flat file format may not be fast, but everyone can handle it. C believed that quick and dirty solutions should be balanced with long-term infrastructural solutions. For instance, Perl can be paired with external representations of ATLAS files to create a working system. C also suggested that alternatives to P files might be interesting too, though the disadvantage would, once again, be the learning curve.

tr-sq-67

tr-sq-67_0

What did F think about the disadvantages of ATLAS and other options? Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

F wanted to ensure that prosodic features could be dealt with at the level of small linguistic units. F proposed that they be attached to the word or segment level with the option of extracting smaller units. This would allow the team to keep what they have without starting over.

tr-gq-68

tr-gq-68_0

Summarize the whole meeting Grad C: Yeah, we had a long discussion about how much w how easy we want to make it for people to bleep things out. So {disfmarker} Morgan wants to make it hard. PhD D: It {disfmarker} it doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Did {disfmarker} did {disfmarker} did it {disfmarker}? I didn't even check yesterday whether it was moving. PhD D: It didn't move yesterday either when I started it. Grad C: So. PhD D: So I don't know if it doesn't like both of us {disfmarker} Grad C: Channel three? Channel three? PhD D: You know, I discovered something yesterday on these, um, wireless ones. Grad B: Channel two. Grad C: Mm - hmm? PhD D: You can tell if it's picking up {pause} breath noise and stuff. Grad C: Yeah, it has a little indicator on it {disfmarker} on the AF. PhD D: Mm - hmm. So if you {disfmarker} yeah, if you breathe under {disfmarker} breathe and then you see AF go off, then you know {pause} it's p picking up your mouth noise. PhD F: Oh, that's good. Cuz we have a lot of breath noises. Grad C: Yep. Test. PhD F: In fact, if you listen to just the channels of people not talking, it's like" @ @" . It's very disgust Grad C: What? Did you see Hannibal recently or something? PhD F: Sorry. Exactly. It's very disconcerting. OK. So, um, Grad C: PhD F: I was gonna try to get out of here, like, in half an hour, um, cuz I really appreciate people coming, and {vocalsound} the main thing that I was gonna ask people to help with today is {pause} to give input on what kinds of database format we should {pause} use in starting to link up things like word transcripts and annotations of word transcripts, so anything that transcribers or discourse coders or whatever put in the signal, {vocalsound} with time - marks for, like, words and phone boundaries and all the stuff we get out of the forced alignments and the recognizer. So, we have this, um {disfmarker} I think a starting point is clearly the {disfmarker} the channelized {pause} output of Dave Gelbart's program, which Don brought a copy of, Grad C: Yeah. Yeah, I'm {disfmarker} I'm familiar with that. I mean, we {disfmarker} I sort of already have developed an XML format for this sort of stuff. PhD F: um, which {disfmarker} PhD D: Can I see it? Grad C: And so the only question {disfmarker} is it the sort of thing that you want to use or not? Have you looked at that? I mean, I had a web page up. PhD F: Right. So, Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I actually mostly need to be able to link up, or {disfmarker} I it's {disfmarker} it's a question both of what the representation is and {disfmarker} Grad C: You mean, this {disfmarker} I guess I am gonna be standing up and drawing on the board. PhD F: OK, yeah. So you should, definitely. Grad C: Um, so {disfmarker} so it definitely had that as a concept. So tha it has a single time - line, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: and then you can have lots of different sections, each of which have I Ds attached to it, and then you can refer from other sections to those I Ds, if you want to. So that, um {disfmarker} so that you start with {disfmarker} with a time - line tag." Time - line" . And then you have a bunch of times. I don't e I don't remember exactly what my notation was, PhD A: Oh, I remember seeing an example of this. Grad C: but it {disfmarker} PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yeah," T equals one point three two" , uh {disfmarker} And then I {disfmarker} I also had optional things like accuracy, and then" ID equals T one, uh, one seven" . And then, {nonvocalsound} I also wanted to {disfmarker} to be i to be able to not specify specifically what the time was and just have a stamp. PhD F: Right. Grad C: Yeah, so these are arbitrary, assigned by a program, not {disfmarker} not by a user. So you have a whole bunch of those. And then somewhere la further down you might have something like an utterance tag which has" start equals T - seventeen, end equals T - eighteen" . So what that's saying is, we know it starts at this particular time. We don't know when it ends. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? But it ends at this T - eighteen, which may be somewhere else. We say there's another utterance. We don't know what the t time actually is but we know that it's the same time as this end time. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: You know, thirty - eight, whatever you want. PhD A: So you're essentially defining a lattice. Grad C: OK. Yes, exactly. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: And then, uh {disfmarker} and then these also have I Ds. Right? So you could {disfmarker} you could have some sort of other {disfmarker} other tag later in the file that would be something like, um, oh, I don't know, {comment} uh, {nonvocalsound}" noise - type equals {nonvocalsound} door - slam" . You know? And then, uh, {nonvocalsound} you could either say" time equals a particular time - mark" or you could do other sorts of references. So {disfmarker} or {disfmarker} or you might have a prosody {disfmarker}" Prosody" right? D? T? D? T? T? PhD F: It's an O instead of an I, but the D is good. Grad C: You like the D? That's a good D. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: Um, you know, so you could have some sort of type here, and then you could have, um {disfmarker} the utterance that it's referring to could be U - seventeen or something like that. PhD F: OK. So, I mean, that seems {disfmarker} that seems g great for all of the encoding of things with time and, Grad C: Oh, well. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess my question is more, uh, what d what do you do with, say, a forced alignment? PhD A: How - how PhD F: I mean you've got all these phone labels, and what do you do if you {disfmarker} just conceptually, if you get, um, transcriptions where the words are staying but the time boundaries are changing, cuz you've got a new recognition output, or s sort of {disfmarker} what's the, um, sequence of going from the waveforms that stay the same, the transcripts that may or may not change, and then the utterance which {disfmarker} where the time boundaries that may or may not change {disfmarker}? PhD A: Oh, that's {disfmarker} That's actually very nicely handled here because you could {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} all you'd have to change is the, {vocalsound} um, time - stamps in the time - line without {disfmarker} without, uh, changing the I Ds. PhD F: Um. And you'd be able to propagate all of the {disfmarker} the information? Grad C: Right. That's, the who that's why you do that extra level of indirection. So that you can just change the time - line. PhD A: Except the time - line is gonna be huge. If you say {disfmarker} Grad C: Yes. PhD F: Yeah, PhD A: suppose you have a phone - level alignment. PhD F: yeah, especially at the phone - level. PhD A: You'd have {disfmarker} you'd have {disfmarker} PhD F: The {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} we have phone - level backtraces. Grad C: Yeah, this {disfmarker} I don't think I would do this for phone - level. I think for phone - level you want to use some sort of binary representation PhD F: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: because it'll be too dense otherwise. PhD F: OK. So, if you were doing that and you had this sort of companion, uh, thing that gets called up for phone - level, uh, what would that look like? PhD A: Why Grad C: I would use just an existing {disfmarker} an existing way of doing it. PhD F: How would you {disfmarker}? PhD A: Mmm. But {disfmarker} but why not use it for phone - level? PhD F: H h PhD A: It's just a matter of {disfmarker} it's just a matter of it being bigger. But if you have {disfmarker} you know, barring memory limitations, or uh {disfmarker} I w I mean this is still the m Grad C: It's parsing limitations. I don't want to have this text file that you have to read in the whole thing to do something very simple for. PhD A: Oh, no. You would use it only {pause} for {pause} purposes where you actually want the phone - level information, I'd imagine. PhD F: So you could have some file that configures how much information you want in your {disfmarker} in your XML or something. Grad C: Right. I mean, you'd {disfmarker} y PhD F: Um, PhD A: You {disfmarker} Grad C: I {disfmarker} I am imagining you'd have multiple versions of this depending on the information that you want. PhD F: cuz th it does get very bush with {disfmarker} Right. Grad C: Um, I'm just {disfmarker} what I'm wondering is whether {disfmarker} I think for word - level, this would be OK. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: For word - level, it's alright. PhD F: Yeah. Definitely. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: For lower than word - level, you're talking about so much data that I just {disfmarker} I don't know. I don't know if that {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, we actually have {disfmarker} So, one thing that Don is doing, is we're {disfmarker} we're running {disfmarker} For every frame, you get a pitch value, PhD D: Lattices are big, too. PhD F: and not only one pitch value but different kinds of pitch values Grad C: Yeah, I mean, for something like that I would use P - file PhD F: depending on {disfmarker} Grad C: or {disfmarker} or any frame - level stuff I would use P - file. PhD F: Meaning {disfmarker}? Grad C: Uh, that's a {disfmarker} well, or something like it. It's ICS uh, ICSI has a format for frame - level representation of features. Um. PhD F: OK. That you could call {disfmarker} that you would tie into this representation with like an ID. Grad C: Right. Right. Or {disfmarker} or there's a {disfmarker} there's a particular way in XML to refer to external resources. PhD F: And {disfmarker} OK. Grad C: So you would say" refer to this external file" . Um, so that external file wouldn't be in {disfmarker} PhD F: So that might {disfmarker} that might work. PhD D: But what {disfmarker} what's the advantage of doing that versus just putting it into this format? Grad C: More compact, which I think is {disfmarker} is better. PhD D: Uh - huh. Grad C: I mean, if you did it at this {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean these are long meetings and with {disfmarker} for every frame, Grad C: You don't want to do it with that {disfmarker} Anything at frame - level you had better encode binary PhD F: um {disfmarker} Grad C: or it's gonna be really painful. PhD A: Or you just compre I mean, I like text formats. Um, b you can always, uh, G - zip them, and, um, you know, c decompress them on the fly if y if space is really a concern. PhD D: Yeah, I was thi I was thinking the advantage is that we can share this with other people. Grad C: Well, but if you're talking about one per frame, you're talking about gigabyte - size files. You're gonna actually run out of space in your filesystem for one file. PhD F: These are big files. These are really {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} Grad C: Right? Because you have a two - gigabyte limit on most O Ss. PhD A: Right, OK. I would say {disfmarker} OK, so frame - level is probably not a good idea. But for phone - level stuff it's perfectly {disfmarker} PhD F: And th it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Like phones, or syllables, or anything like that. PhD F: Phones are every five frames though, so. Or something like that. PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but most of the frames are actually not speech. So, you know, people don't {disfmarker} v Look at it, words times the average {disfmarker} The average number of phones in an English word is, I don't know, {comment} five maybe? PhD F: Yeah, but we actually {disfmarker} PhD A: So, look at it, t number of words times five. That's not {disfmarker} that not {disfmarker} PhD F: Oh, so you mean pause phones take up a lot of the {disfmarker} long pause phones. PhD A: Exactly. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. OK. That's true. But you do have to keep them in there. Y yeah. Grad C: So I think it {disfmarker} it's debatable whether you want to do phone - level in the same thing. PhD F: OK. Grad C: But I think, a anything at frame - level, even P - file, is too verbose. PhD F: OK. So {disfmarker} Grad C: I would use something tighter than P - files. PhD F: Do you {disfmarker} Are you familiar with it? Grad C: So. PhD F: I haven't seen this particular format, PhD A: I mean, I've {disfmarker} I've used them. PhD F: but {disfmarker} PhD A: I don't know what their structure is. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I've forgot what the str PhD D: But, wait a minute, P - file for each frame is storing a vector of cepstral or PLP values, Grad C: It's whatever you want, actually. PhD D: right? Right. Grad C: So that {disfmarker} what's nice about the P - file {disfmarker} It {disfmarker} i Built into it is the concept of {pause} frames, utterances, sentences, that sort of thing, that structure. And then also attached to it is an arbitrary vector of values. And it can take different types. PhD F: Oh. Grad C: So it {disfmarker} th they don't all have to be floats. You know, you can have integers and you can have doubles, and all that sort of stuff. PhD F: So that {disfmarker} that sounds {disfmarker} that sounds about what I w Grad C: Um. Right? And it has a header {disfmarker} it has a header format that {pause} describes it {pause} to some extent. So, the only problem with it is it's actually storing the {pause} utterance numbers and the {pause} frame numbers in the file, even though they're always sequential. And so it does waste a lot of space. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: But it's still a lot tighter than {disfmarker} than ASCII. And we have a lot of tools already to deal with it. PhD F: You do? OK. Is there some documentation on this somewhere? Grad C: Yeah, there's a ton of it. Man - pages and, uh, source code, and me. PhD F: OK, great. So, I mean, that sounds good. I {disfmarker} I was just looking for something {disfmarker} I'm not a database person, but something sort of standard enough that, you know, if we start using this we can give it out, other people can work on it, Grad C: Yeah, it's not standard. PhD F: or {disfmarker} {comment} Is it {disfmarker}? Grad C: I mean, it's something that we developed at ICSI. But, uh {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's {pause} been used here Grad C: But it's been used here PhD F: and people've {disfmarker} Grad C: and {disfmarker} and, you know, we have a {pause} well - configured system that you can distribute for free, and {disfmarker} PhD D: I mean, it must be the equivalent of whatever you guys used to store feat your computed features in, right? PhD F: OK. PhD A: Yeah, th we have {disfmarker} Actually, we {disfmarker} we use a generalization of the {disfmarker} the Sphere format. PhD D: Mmm. PhD A: Um, but {disfmarker} Yeah, so there is something like that but it's, um, probably not as sophist Grad C: Well, what does H T K do for features? PhD D: And I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: Or does it even have a concept of features? PhD A: They ha it has its own {disfmarker} I mean, Entropic has their own feature format that's called, like, S - SD or some so SF or something like that. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I'm just wondering, would it be worth while to use that instead? PhD D: Yeah. PhD A: Hmm? PhD F: Yeah. Th - this is exactly the kind of decision {disfmarker} It's just whatever {disfmarker} PhD D: But, I mean, people don't typically share this kind of stuff, right? PhD A: Right. Grad C: They generate their own. PhD D: I mean {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD F: Actually, I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} you know, we {disfmarker} we've done this stuff on prosodics and three or four places have asked for those prosodic files, and we just have an ASCII, uh, output of frame - by - frame. Grad C: Ah, right. PhD F: Which is fine, but it gets unwieldy to go in and {disfmarker} and query these files with really huge files. Grad C: Right. PhD F: I mean, we could do it. I was just thinking if there's something that {disfmarker} where all the frame values are {disfmarker} Grad C: And a and again, if you have a {disfmarker} if you have a two - hour - long meeting, that's gonna {disfmarker} PhD F: Hmm? They're {disfmarker} they're fair they're quite large. Grad C: Yeah, I mean, they'd be emo enormous. PhD F: And these are for ten - minute Switchboard conversations, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and {disfmarker} So it's doable, it's just that you can only store a feature vector at frame - by - frame and it doesn't have any kind of, PhD D: Is {disfmarker} is the sharing part of this a pretty important {pause} consideration PhD F: um {disfmarker} PhD D: or does that just sort of, uh {disfmarker} a nice thing to have? PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't know enough about what we're gonna do with the data. But I thought it would be good to get something that we can {disfmarker} that other people can use or adopt for their own kinds of encoding. And just, I mean we have to use some we have to make some decision about what to do. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: And especially for the prosody work, what {disfmarker} what it ends up being is you get features from the signal, and of course those change every time your alignments change. So you re - run a recognizer, you want to recompute your features, um, and then keep the database up to date. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Or you change a word, or you change a {vocalsound} utterance boundary segment, which is gonna happen a lot. And so I wanted something where {pause} all of this can be done in a elegant way and that if somebody wants to try something or compute something else, that it can be done flexibly. Um, it doesn't have to be pretty, it just has to be, you know, easy to use, and {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, the other thing {disfmarker} We should look at ATLAS, the NIST thing, PhD F: Oh. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: and see if they have anything at that level. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, I'm not sure what to do about this with ATLAS, because they chose a different route. I chose something that {disfmarker} Th - there are sort of two choices. Your {disfmarker} your file format can know about {disfmarker} know that you're talking about language {pause} and speech, which is what I chose, and time, or your file format can just be a graph representation. And then the application has to impose the structure on top. So what it looked like ATLAS chose is, they chose the other way, which was their file format is just nodes and links, and you have to interpret what they mean yourself. PhD F: And why did you not choose that type of approach? Grad C: Uh, because I knew that we were doing speech, and I thought it was better if you're looking at a raw file to be {disfmarker} t for the tags to say" it's an utterance" , as opposed to the tag to say" it's a link" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: So, but {disfmarker} PhD F: But other than that, are they compatible? I mean, you could sort of {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, they're reasonably compatible. PhD F: I mean, you {disfmarker} you could {disfmarker} PhD D: You could probably translate between them. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Yeah, that's w So, Grad C: So, well, the other thing is if we choose to use ATLAS, which maybe we should just do, we should just throw this out before we invest a lot of time in it. PhD F: OK. I don't {disfmarker} So this is what the meeting's about, Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: just sort of how to {disfmarker} Um, cuz we need to come up with a database like this just to do our work. And I actually don't care, as long as it's something useful to other people, what we choose. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So maybe it's {disfmarker} maybe oth you know, if {disfmarker} if you have any idea of how to choose, cuz I don't. Grad C: The only thing {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: Do they already have tools? Grad C: I mean, I {disfmarker} I chose this for a couple reasons. One of them is that it's easy to parse. You don't need a full XML parser. It's very easy to just write a Perl script {pause} to parse it. PhD A: As long as uh each tag is on one line. Grad C: Exactly. Exactly. Which I always do. PhD F: And you can have as much information in the tag as you want, right? Grad C: Well, I have it structured. Right? So each type tag has only particular items that it can take. PhD F: Can you {disfmarker} But you can add to those structures if you {disfmarker} Grad C: Sure. If you have more information. So what {disfmarker} What NIST would say is that instead of doing this, you would say something like" link {nonvocalsound} start equals, um, you know, some node ID, PhD F: Yeah. So {disfmarker} Grad C: end equals some other node ID" , and then" type" would be" utterance" . PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: You know, so it's very similar. PhD F: So why would it be a {disfmarker} a waste to do it this way if it's similar enough that we can always translate it? PhD D: It probably wouldn't be a waste. It would mean that at some point if we wanted to switch, we'd just have to translate everything. Grad C: Write a translator. But it se Since they are developing a big {disfmarker} PhD F: But it {disfmarker} but that sounds {disfmarker} PhD D: But that's {disfmarker} I don't think that's a big deal. PhD F: As long as it is {disfmarker} Grad C: they're developing a big infrastructure. And so it seems to me that if {disfmarker} if we want to use that, we might as well go directly to what they're doing, rather than {disfmarker} PhD A: If we want to {disfmarker} Do they already have something that's {disfmarker} that would be useful for us in place? PhD D: Yeah. See, that's the question. I mean, how stable is their {disfmarker} Are they ready to go, Grad C: The {disfmarker} I looked at it {disfmarker} PhD D: or {disfmarker}? Grad C: The last time I looked at it was a while ago, probably a year ago, uh, when we first started talking about this. PhD D: Hmm. Grad C: And at that time at least {vocalsound} it was still not very {pause} complete. And so, specifically they didn't have any external format representation at that time. They just had the sort of conceptual {pause} node {disfmarker} uh, annotated transcription graph, which I really liked. And that's exactly what this stuff is based on. Since then, they've developed their own external file format, which is, uh, you know, this sort of s this sort of thing. Um, and apparently they've also developed a lot of tools, but I haven't looked at them. Maybe I should. PhD A: We should {disfmarker} we should find out. PhD F: I mean, would the tools {disfmarker} would the tools run on something like this, if you can translate them anyway? Grad C: Um, th what would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} would {disfmarker} what would worry me is that maybe we might miss a little detail PhD A: It's a hassle PhD F: I mean, that {disfmarker} I guess it's a question that {disfmarker} PhD A: if {disfmarker} PhD F: uh, yeah. Grad C: that would make it very difficult to translate from one to the other. PhD F: OK. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I think if it's conceptually close, and they already have or will have tools that everybody else will be using, I mean, {vocalsound} it would be crazy to do something s you know, separate that {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. Grad C: Yeah, we might as well. Yep. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: So I'll {disfmarker} I'll take a closer look at it. PhD F: Actually, so it's {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that would really be the question, is just what you would feel is in the long run the best thing. Grad C: And {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: Cuz {vocalsound} once we start, sort of, doing this I don't {disfmarker} we don't actually have enough time to probably have to rehash it out again Grad C: The {disfmarker} Yep. The other thing {disfmarker} the other way that I sort of established this was as easy translation to and from the Transcriber format. PhD F: and {disfmarker} s Right. Grad C: Um, PhD F: Right. Grad C: but {disfmarker} PhD F: I mean, I like this. This is sort of intuitively easy to actually r read, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: as easy it could {disfmarker} as it could be. But, I suppose that {pause} as long as they have a type here that specifies" utt" , um, Grad C: It's almost the same. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} yeah, close enough that {disfmarker} Grad C: The {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} with this, though, is that you can't really add any supplementary information. Right? So if you suddenly decide that you want {disfmarker} PhD F: You have to make a different type. Grad C: Yeah. You'd have to make a different type. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Well, if you look at it and {disfmarker} Um, I guess in my mind I don't know enough {disfmarker} Jane would know better, {comment} about the {pause} types of annotations and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} But I imagine that those are things that would {disfmarker} well, you guys mentioned this, {comment} that could span any {disfmarker} it could be in its own channel, it could span time boundaries of any type, Grad C: Right. PhD F: it could be instantaneous, things like that. Um, and then from the recognition side we have backtraces at the phone - level. Grad C: Right. PhD F: If {disfmarker} if it can handle that, it could handle states or whatever. And then at the prosody - level we have frame {disfmarker} sort of like cepstral feature files, Grad C: Yep. PhD F: uh, like these P - files or anything like that. And that's sort of the world of things that I {disfmarker} And then we have the aligned channels, of course, Grad C: Right. PhD A: It seems to me you want to keep the frame - level stuff separate. PhD F: and {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: And then {disfmarker} PhD F: I {disfmarker} I definitely agree and I wanted to find actually a f a nicer format or a {disfmarker} maybe a more compact format than what we used before. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Just cuz you've got {vocalsound} ten channels or whatever and two hours of a meeting. It's {disfmarker} it's a lot of {disfmarker} Grad C: Huge. PhD A: Now {disfmarker} now how would you {disfmarker} how would you represent, um, multiple speakers in this framework? Were {disfmarker} You would just represent them as {disfmarker} Grad C: Um, PhD A: You would have like a speaker tag or something? Grad C: there's a spea speaker tag up at the top which identifies them and then each utt the way I had it is each turn or each utterance, {comment} I don't even remember now, had a speaker ID tag attached to it. PhD A: Mm - hmm. OK. Grad C: And in this format you would have a different tag, which {disfmarker} which would, uh, be linked to the link. So {disfmarker} so somewhere else you would have another thing {pause} that would be, PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: um {disfmarker} Let's see, would it be a node or a link? Um {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} so this one would have, um, an ID is link {disfmarker} {comment} link seventy - four or something like that. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: And then somewhere up here you would have a link that {disfmarker} that, uh, you know, was referencing L - seventy - four and had speaker Adam. PhD A: Is i? Grad C: You know, or something like that. PhD F: Actually, it's the channel, I think, that {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, channel or speaker or whatever. PhD F: I mean, w yeah, channel is what the channelized output out PhD A: It doesn't {disfmarker} Grad C: This isn't quite right. PhD A: Right. Grad C: I have to look at it again. PhD F: Yeah, but {disfmarker} PhD A: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} so how in the NIST format do we express {vocalsound} a hierarchical relationship between, um, say, an utterance and the words within it? So how do you {pause} tell {pause} that {pause} these are the words that belong to that utterance? Grad C: Um, you would have another structure lower down than this that would be saying they're all belonging to this ID. PhD A: Mm - hmm. PhD D: So each thing refers to the {pause} utterance that it belongs to. Grad C: Right. And then each utterance could refer to a turn, PhD D: So it's {disfmarker} it's not hi it's sort of bottom - up. Grad C: and each turn could refer to something higher up. PhD F: And what if you actually have {disfmarker} So right now what you have as utterance, um, the closest thing that comes out of the channelized is the stuff between the segment boundaries that the transcribers put in or that Thilo put in, which may or may not actually be, like, a s it's usually not {disfmarker} um, the beginning and end of a sentence, say. Grad C: Well, that's why I didn't call it" sentence" . PhD F: So, right. Um, so it's like a segment or something. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: So, I mean, I assume this is possible, that if you have {disfmarker} someone annotates the punctuation or whatever when they transcribe, you can say, you know, from {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} from the c beginning of the sentence to the end of the sentence, from the annotations, this is a unit, even though it never actually {disfmarker} i It's only a unit by virtue of the annotations {pause} at the word - level. Grad C: Sure. I mean, so you would {disfmarker} you would have yet another tag. PhD F: And then that would get a tag somehow. Grad C: You'd have another tag which says this is of type" sentence" . PhD F: OK. OK. Grad C: And, what {disfmarker} PhD F: But it's just not overtly in the {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD F: Um, cuz this is exactly the kind of {disfmarker} PhD A: So {disfmarker} PhD F: I think that should be {pause} possible as long as the {disfmarker} But, uh, what I don't understand is where the {disfmarker} where in this type of file {pause} that would be expressed. Grad C: Right. You would have another tag somewhere. It's {disfmarker} well, there're two ways of doing it. PhD F: S so it would just be floating before the sentence or floating after the sentence without a time - mark. Grad C: You could have some sort of link type {disfmarker} type equals" sentence" , and ID is" S - whatever" . And then lower down you could have an utterance. So the type is" utterance" {disfmarker} equals" utt" . And you could either say that {disfmarker} No. I don't know {disfmarker} PhD A: So here's the thing. Grad C: I take that back. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} can you say that this is part of this, PhD F: See, cuz it's {disfmarker} PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: it's {disfmarker} PhD D: You would just have a r PhD F: S Grad C: or do you say this is part of this? I think {disfmarker} PhD D: You would refer up to the sentence. PhD F: But they're {disfmarker} PhD A: Well, the thing {disfmarker} PhD F: they're actually overlapping each other, sort of. Grad C: So {disfmarker} PhD A: the thing is that some something may be a part of one thing for one purpose and another thing of another purpose. Grad C: Right. PhD A: So f PhD F: You have to have another type then, I guess. PhD A: s Um, well, s let's {disfmarker} let's ta so let's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I think I'm {disfmarker} I think w I had better look at it again PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: so {disfmarker} Grad C: because I {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} PhD F: OK. OK. PhD A: y So for instance @ @ {comment} sup Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection that I'm forgetting. PhD A: Suppose you have a word sequence and you have two different segmentations of that same word sequence. f Say, one segmentation is in terms of, um, you know, uh, sentences. And another segmentation is in terms of, um, {vocalsound} I don't know, {comment} prosodic phrases. And let's say that they don't {pause} nest. So, you know, a prosodic phrase may cross two sentences or something. Grad C: Right. PhD A: I don't know if that's true or not but {vocalsound} let's as PhD F: Well, it's definitely true with the segment. PhD A: Right. PhD F: That's what I {disfmarker} exactly what I meant by the utterances versus the sentence could be sort of {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. So, you want to be s you want to say this {disfmarker} this word is part of that sentence and this prosodic phrase. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: But the phrase is not part of the sentence PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: and neither is the sentence part of the phrase. PhD F: Right. Grad C: I I'm pretty sure that you can do that, but I'm forgetting the exact level of nesting. PhD A: So, you would have to have {vocalsound} two different pointers from the word up {disfmarker} one level up, one to the sent Grad C: So {disfmarker} so what you would end up having is a tag saying" here's a word, and it starts here and it ends here" . PhD A: Right. Grad C: And then lower down you would say" here's a prosodic boundary and it has these words in it" . And lower down you'd have" here's a sentence, PhD A: Right. PhD F: An - Right. Grad C: and it has these words in it" . PhD F: So you would be able to go in and say, you know," give me all the words in the bound in the prosodic phrase Grad C: Yep. PhD F: and give me all the words in the {disfmarker}" Yeah. Grad C: So I think that's {disfmarker} that would wor PhD F: Um, OK. Grad C: Let me look at it again. PhD A: Mm - hmm. The {disfmarker} the o the other issue that you had was, how do you actually efficiently extract, um {disfmarker} find and extract information in a structure of this type? PhD F: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: That's good. PhD A: So you gave some examples like {disfmarker} PhD F: Well, uh, and, I mean, you guys might {disfmarker} I don't know if this is premature because I suppose once you get the representation you can do this, but the kinds of things I was worried about is, PhD A: No, that's not clear. PhD F: uh {disfmarker} PhD A: I mean, yeah, you c sure you can do it, PhD F: Well, OK. So i if it {disfmarker} PhD A: but can you do it sort of l l you know, it {disfmarker} PhD F: I I mean, I can't do it, but I can {disfmarker} um, PhD A: y y you gotta {disfmarker} you gotta do this {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you're gonna want to do this very quickly Grad C: Well {disfmarker} PhD A: or else you'll spend all your time sort of searching through very {vocalsound} complex data structures {disfmarker} PhD F: Right. You'd need a p sort of a paradigm for how to do it. But an example would be" find all the cases in which Adam started to talk while Andreas was talking and his pitch was rising, Andreas's pitch" . That kind of thing. Grad C: Right. I mean, that's gonna be {disfmarker} Is the rising pitch a {pause} feature, or is it gonna be in the same file? PhD F: Well, the rising pitch will never be {pause} hand - annotated. So the {disfmarker} all the prosodic features are going to be automatically {disfmarker} Grad C: But the {disfmarker} I mean, that's gonna be hard regardless, PhD F: So they're gonna be in those {disfmarker} Grad C: right? Because you're gonna have to write a program that goes through your feature file and looks for rising pitches. PhD A: Yeah. PhD F: So {disfmarker} Right. So normally what we would do is we would say" what do we wanna assign rising pitch to?" Are we gonna assign it to words? Are we gonna just assign it to sort of {disfmarker} when it's rising we have a begin - end rise representation? But suppose we dump out this file and we say, uh, for every word we just classify it as, w you know, rise or fall or neither? Grad C: OK. Well, in that case you would add that to this {pause} format PhD F: OK. Grad C: r PhD F: So we would basically be sort of, um, taking the format and enriching it with things that we wanna query in relation to the words that are already in the file, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and then querying it. PhD A: You want sort of a grep that's {disfmarker} that works at the structural {disfmarker} on the structural representation. PhD F: OK. Grad C: You have that. There's a {pause} standard again in XML, specifically for searching XML documents {disfmarker} structured X - XML documents, where you can specify both the content and the structural position. PhD A: Yeah, but it's {disfmarker} it's not clear that that's {disfmarker} That's relative to the structure of the XML document, PhD F: If {disfmarker} PhD A: not to the structure of what you're representing in the document. Grad C: You use it as a tool. You use it as a tool, not an end - user. It's not an end - user thing. PhD A: Right. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} you would use that to build your tool to do that sort of search. PhD A: Right. Be Because here you're specifying a lattice. PhD F: Uh {disfmarker} PhD A: So the underlying {disfmarker} that's the underlying data structure. And you want to be able to search in that lattice. PhD F: But as long as the {disfmarker} Grad C: It's a graph, but {disfmarker} PhD A: That's different from searching through the text. PhD F: But it seems like as long as the features that {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, no, no, no. The whole point is that the text and the lattice are isomorphic. They {pause} represent each other {pause} completely. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So that {disfmarker} I mean th PhD F: That's true if the features from your acoustics or whatever that are not explicitly in this are at the level of these types. PhD A: Hhh. PhD F: That {disfmarker} that if you can do that {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, but that's gonna be the trouble no matter what. Right? No matter what format you choose, you're gonna have the trou you're gonna have the difficulty of relating the {disfmarker} the frame - level features {disfmarker} PhD F: That's right. That's true. That's why I was trying to figure out what's the best format for this representation. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: And it's still gonna be {disfmarker} PhD A: Hmm. PhD F: it's still gonna be, uh, not direct. Grad C: Right. PhD F: You know, it {disfmarker} Or another example was, you know, uh, where in the language {disfmarker} where in the word sequence are people interrupting? So, I guess that one's actually easier. PhD D: What about {disfmarker} what about, um, the idea of using a relational database to, uh, store the information from the XML? So you would have {disfmarker} XML basically would {disfmarker} Uh, you {disfmarker} you could use the XML to put the data in, and then when you get data out, you put it back in XML. So use XML as sort of the {disfmarker} the transfer format, Grad C: Transfer. PhD D: uh, but then you store the data in the database, which allows you to do all kinds of {pause} good search things in there. Grad C: The, uh {disfmarker} One of the things that ATLAS is doing is they're trying to define an API which is independent of the back store, PhD F: Huh. Grad C: so that, uh, you could define a single API and the {disfmarker} the storage could be flat XML files or a database. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Grad C: My opinion on that is for the s sort of stuff that we're doing, {comment} I suspect it's overkill to do a full relational database, that, um, just a flat file and, uh, search tools I bet will be enough. PhD A: But {disfmarker} Grad C: But that's the advantage of ATLAS, is that if we actually take {disfmarker} decide to go that route completely and we program to their API, then if we wanted to add a database later it would be pretty easy. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD F: It seems like the kind of thing you'd do if {disfmarker} I don't know, if people start adding all kinds of s bells and whistles to the data. And so that might be {disfmarker} I mean, it'd be good for us to know {disfmarker} to use a format where we know we can easily, um, input that to some database if other people are using it. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: Something like that. Grad C: I guess I'm just a little hesitant to try to go whole hog on sort of the {disfmarker} the whole framework that {disfmarker} that NIST is talking about, with ATLAS and a database and all that sort of stuff, PhD F: So {disfmarker} Grad C: cuz it's a big learning curve, just to get going. PhD D: Hmm. PhD A: Hmm. Grad C: Whereas if we just do a flat file format, sure, it may not be as efficient but everyone can program in Perl and {disfmarker} and use it. PhD F: OK. Grad C: Right? PhD A: But this is {disfmarker} Grad C: So, as opposed to {disfmarker} PhD A: I {disfmarker} I'm still, um, {vocalsound} not convinced that you can do much at all on the text {disfmarker} on the flat file that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} you know, the text representation. e Because the text representation is gonna be, uh, not reflecting the structure of {disfmarker} of your words and annotations. It's just {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, if it's not representing it, then how do you recover it? Of course it's representing it. PhD A: No. You {disfmarker} you have to {disfmarker} what you have to do is you have to basically {disfmarker} Grad C: That's the whole point. PhD A: Y yeah. You can use Perl to read it in and construct a internal representation that is essentially a lattice. But, the {disfmarker} and then {disfmarker} Grad C: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Grad C: Well, that was a different point. PhD A: Right. Grad C: Right? So what I was saying is that {disfmarker} PhD A: But that's what you'll have to do. Bec - be Grad C: For Perl {disfmarker} if you want to just do Perl. If you wanted to use the structured XML query language, that's a different thing. And it's a set of tools {vocalsound} that let you specify given the D - DDT {disfmarker} DTD of the document, um, what sorts of structural searches you want to do. So you want to say that, you know, you're looking for, um, a tag within a tag within a particular tag that has this particular text in it, um, and, uh, refers to a particular value. And so the point isn't that an end - user, who is looking for a query like you specified, wouldn't program it in this language. What you would do is, someone would build a tool that used that as a library. So that they {disfmarker} so that you wouldn't have to construct the internal representations yourself. PhD F: Is a {disfmarker} See, I think the kinds of questions, at least in the next {disfmarker} to the end of this year, are {disfmarker} there may be a lot of different ones, but they'll all have a similar nature. They'll be looking at either a word - level prosodic, uh, an {disfmarker} a value, Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: like a continuous value, like the slope of something. But you know, we'll do something where we {disfmarker} some kind of data reduction where the prosodic features are sort o uh, either at the word - level or at the segment - level, Grad C: Right. PhD F: or {disfmarker} or something like that. They're not gonna be at the phone - level and they're no not gonna be at the frame - level when we get done with sort of giving them simpler shapes and things. And so the main thing is just being able {disfmarker} Well, I guess, the two goals. Um, one that Chuck mentioned is starting out with something that we don't have to start over, that we don't have to throw away if other people want to extend it for other kinds of questions, Grad C: Right. PhD F: and being able to at least get enough, uh, information out on {disfmarker} where we condition the location of features on information that's in the kind of file that you {pause} put up there. And that would {disfmarker} that would do it, Grad C: Yeah. I think that there are quick and dirty solutions, PhD F: I mean, for me. Grad C: and then there are long - term, big - infrastructure solutions. And so {vocalsound} we want to try to pick something that lets us do a little bit of both. PhD F: In the between, right. And especially that the representation doesn't have to be thrown away, Grad C: Um {disfmarker} Right. PhD F: even if your tools change. Grad C: And so it seems to me that {disfmarker} I mean, I have to look at it again to see whether it can really do what we want, but if we use the ATLAS external file representation, um, it seems like it's rich enough that you could do quick tools just as I said in Perl, and then later on if we choose to go up the learning curve, we can use the whole ATLAS inter infrastructure, PhD F: Yeah. I mean, that sounds good to me. Grad C: which has all that built in. PhD F: I {disfmarker} I don't {disfmarker} So if {disfmarker} if you would l look at that and let us know what you think. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: I mean, I think we're sort of guinea pigs, cuz I {disfmarker} I want to get the prosody work done but I don't want to waste time, you know, getting the {disfmarker} PhD A: Oh, maybe {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah? PhD A: um {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I wouldn't wait for the formats, because anything you pick we'll be able to translate to another form. PhD A: Well {disfmarker} Ma well, maybe you should actually look at it yourself too to get a sense of what it is you'll {disfmarker} you'll be dealing with, PhD F: OK. PhD A: because, um, you know, Adam might have one opinion but you might have another, so Grad B: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah, definitely. PhD A: I think the more eyes look at this the better. PhD F: Especially if there's, e um {disfmarker} you know, if someone can help with at least the {disfmarker} the setup of the right {disfmarker} Grad C: Hi, Jane. PhD F: Oh, hi. PhD A: Mmm. PhD F: the right representation, then, i you know, I hope it won't {disfmarker} We don't actually need the whole full - blown thing to be ready, Grad C: Can you {disfmarker} Oh, well. PhD F: so. Um, so maybe if you guys can look at it and sort of see what, Grad B: Yeah. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: um {disfmarker} I think we're {disfmarker} we're {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we're actually just {disfmarker} Grad C: We're about done. PhD F: yeah, Grad B: Hmm. PhD F: wrapping up, but, um {disfmarker} Yeah, sorry, it's a uh short meeting, but, um {disfmarker} Well, I don't know. Is there anything else, like {disfmarker} I mean that helps me a lot, Grad C: Well, I think the other thing we might want to look at is alternatives to P - file. PhD F: but {disfmarker} Grad C: I mean, th the reason I like P - file is I'm already familiar with it, we have expertise here, and so if we pick something else, there's the learning - curve problem. But, I mean, it is just something we developed at ICSI. PhD A: Is there an {disfmarker} is there an IP - API? Grad C: And so {disfmarker} Yeah. PhD A: OK. Grad C: There's an API for it. And, uh, PhD A: There used to be a problem that they get too large, Grad C: a bunch of libraries, P - file utilities. PhD A: and so {pause} basically the {disfmarker} uh the filesystem wouldn't {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, that's gonna be a problem no matter what. You have the two - gigabyte limit on the filesystem size. And we definitely hit that with Broadcast News. PhD A: Maybe you could extend the API to, uh, support, uh, like splitting up, you know, conceptually one file into smaller files on disk so that you can essentially, you know, have arbitrarily long f Grad C: Yep. Most of the tools can handle that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: So that we didn't do it at the API - level. We did it at the t tool - level. That {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} most {disfmarker} many of them can s you can specify several P - files and they'll just be done sequentially. PhD A: OK. Grad C: So. PhD F: So, I guess, yeah, if {disfmarker} if you and Don can {disfmarker} if you can show him the P - file stuff and see. Grad C: Sure. PhD F: So this would be like for the F - zero {disfmarker} Grad B: True. Grad C: I mean, if you do" man P - file" or" apropos P - file" , you'll see a lot. Grad B: I've used the P - file, I think. I've looked at it at least, briefly, I think when we were doing s something. PhD A: What does the P stand for anyway? Grad C: I have no idea. Grad B: Oh, in there. Grad C: I didn't de I didn't develop it. You know, it was {disfmarker} I think it was Dave Johnson. So it's all part of the Quicknet library. It has all the utilities for it. PhD A: No, P - files were around way before Quicknet. P - files were {disfmarker} were around when {disfmarker} w with, um, {vocalsound} RAP. Grad C: Oh, were they? PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Right? PhD F: It's like the history of ICSI. PhD A: You worked with P - files. Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Like {disfmarker} PhD D: No. PhD A: I worked with P - files. PhD F: Yeah? PhD D: I don't remember what the" P" is, though. PhD A: No. Grad C: But there are ni they're {disfmarker} The {pause} Quicknet library has a bunch of things in it to handle P - files, PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: so it works pretty well. PhD A: PhD F: And that isn't really, I guess, as important as the {disfmarker} the main {disfmarker} I don't know what you call it, the {disfmarker} the main sort of word - level {disfmarker} Grad C: Neither do I. PhD D: Probably stands for" Phil" . Phil Kohn. Grad C: It's a Phil file? PhD D: Yeah. That's my guess. PhD F: Huh. OK. Well, that's really useful. I mean, this is exactly the kind of thing that I wanted to settle. Um, so {disfmarker} Grad C: Yeah, I've been meaning to look at the ATLAS stuff again anyway. PhD F: Great. Grad C: So, just keep {disfmarker} PhD F: Yeah. I guess it's also sort of a political deci I mean, if {disfmarker} if you feel like that's a community that would be good to tie into anyway, then it's {disfmarker} sounds like it's worth doing. Grad C: Yeah, I think it {disfmarker} it w PhD A: j I think there's {disfmarker} Grad C: And, w uh, as I said, I {disfmarker} what I did with this stuff {disfmarker} I based it on theirs. It's just they hadn't actually come up with an external format yet. So now that they have come up with a format, it doesn't {disfmarker} it seems pretty reasonable to use it. PhD A: Mmm. Grad C: But let me look at it again. PhD F: OK, great. Grad C: As I said, that {disfmarker} PhD F: Cuz we actually can start {disfmarker} Grad C: There's one level {disfmarker} there's one more level of indirection and I'm just blanking on exactly how it works. I gotta look at it again. PhD F: I mean, we can start with, um, I guess, this input from Dave's, which you had printed out, the channelized input. Cuz he has all of the channels, you know, with the channels in the tag and stuff like that. Grad C: Yeah, I've seen it. PhD F: So that would be i directly, Grad C: Yep. Easy {disfmarker} easy to map. PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. And so then it would just be a matter of getting {disfmarker} making sure to handle the annotations that are, you know, not at the word - level and, um, t to import the Grad B: Where are those annotations coming from? PhD F: Well, right now, I g Jane would {disfmarker} {vocalsound} would {disfmarker} Grad C: Mm - hmm. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Are you talking about the overlap a annotations? PhD F: Yeah, any kind of annotation {pause} that, like, isn't already there. Uh, you know, anything you can envision. Postdoc E: Yeah. So what I was imagining was {disfmarker} um, so Dave says we can have unlimited numbers of green ribbons. And so put, uh, a {disfmarker} a green ribbon on for an overlap code. And since we w we {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I think it's important to remain flexible regarding the time bins for now. And so it's nice to have {disfmarker} However, you know, you want to have it, uh, time time uh, located in the discourse. So, um, if we {disfmarker} if we tie the overlap code to the first word in the overlap, then you'll have a time - marking. It won't {disfmarker} it'll be independent of the time bins, however these e evolve, shrink, or whatever, increase, or {disfmarker} Also, you could have different time bins for different purposes. And having it tied to the first word in an overlap segment is unique, uh, you know, anchored, clear. And it would just end up on a separate ribbon. Grad C: Right. Postdoc E: So the overlap coding is gonna be easy with respect to that. You look puzzled. PhD D: I {disfmarker} I just {disfmarker} I don't quite understand what these things are. Postdoc E: OK. PhD D: Uh. Postdoc E: What, the codes themselves? PhD D: Well, th overlap codes. Postdoc E: Or the {disfmarker}? PhD D: I'm not sure what that @ @ {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, I mean, is that {disfmarker} PhD D: It probably doesn't matter. Postdoc E: Well, we don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, it doesn't. PhD D: No, I d Postdoc E: We don't have to go into the codes. Grad C: I mean, that {disfmarker} not for the topic of this meeting. Postdoc E: But let me just {disfmarker} No. W the idea is just to have a separate green ribbon, you know, and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and let's say that this is a time bin. There's a word here. This is the first word of an overlapping segment of any length, overlapping with any other, uh, word {disfmarker} uh, i segment of any length. And, um, then you can indicate that this here was perhaps a ch a backchannel, or you can say that it was, um, a usurping of the turn, or you can {disfmarker} you know, any {disfmarker} any number of categories. But the fact is, you have it time - tagged in a way that's independent of the, uh, sp particular time bin that the word ends up in. If it's a large unit or a small unit, or PhD A: Mm - hmm. Postdoc E: we sh change the boundaries of the units, it's still unique and {disfmarker} and, uh, fits with the format, PhD F: Right. Postdoc E: flexible, all that. PhD A: Um, it would be nice {disfmarker} um, eh, gr this is sort of r regarding {disfmarker} uh, uh it's related but not directly germane to the topic of discussion, but, when it comes to annotations, um, you often find yourself in the situation where you have {pause} different annotations {pause} of the same, say, word sequence. OK? Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: And sometimes the word sequences even differ slightly because they were edited s at one place but not the other. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD A: So, once this data gets out there, some people might start annotating this for, I don't know, dialogue acts or, um, you know, topics or what the heck. You know, there's a zillion things that people might annotate this for. And the only thing that is really sort of common among all the versi the various versions of this data is the word sequence, or approximately. Postdoc E: Yep. PhD F: Or the time. PhD A: Or the times. But, see, if you'd annotate dialogue acts, you don't necessarily want to {disfmarker} or topics {disfmarker} you don't really want to be dealing with time - marks. PhD F: I guess. PhD A: You'd {disfmarker} it's much more efficient for them to just see the word sequence, right? PhD F: Mm - hmm. PhD A: I mean, most people aren't as sophisticated as {disfmarker} as we are here with, you know, uh, time alignments and stuff. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} the point is {disfmarker} Grad C: Should {disfmarker} should we mention some names on the people who are n? PhD A: Right. So, um, the p my point is that {pause} you're gonna end up with, uh, word sequences that are differently annotated. And {pause} you want some tool, uh, that is able to sort of merge these different annotations back into a single, uh, version. OK? Um, and we had this problem very massively, uh, at SRI when we worked, uh, a while back on, {vocalsound} uh {disfmarker} well, on dialogue acts as well as, uh, you know, um, what was it? uh, PhD F: Well, all the Switchboard in it. PhD A: utterance types. There's, uh, automatic, uh, punctuation and stuff like that. PhD F: Yeah. PhD A: Because we had one set of {pause} annotations that were based on, uh, one version of the transcripts with a particular segmentation, and then we had another version that was based on, uh, a different s slightly edited version of the transcripts with a different segmentation. So, {vocalsound} we had these two different versions which were {disfmarker} you know, you could tell they were from the same source but they weren't identical. So it was extremely hard {vocalsound} to reliably merge these two back together to correlate the information from the different annotations. Grad C: Yep. I {disfmarker} I don't see any way that file formats are gonna help us with that. PhD A: No. Grad C: It's {disfmarker} it's all a question of semantic. PhD A: No. But once you have a file format, I can imagine writing {disfmarker} not personally, but someone writing a tool that is essentially an alignment tool, um, that mediates between various versions, PhD F: Mm - hmm. Grad C: Yeah. PhD A: and {disfmarker} uh, sort of like th uh, you know, you have this thing in UNIX where you have, uh, diff. Grad C: Diff. PhD F: W - diff or diff. PhD A: There's the, uh, diff that actually tries to reconcile different {disfmarker} two diffs f {comment} based on the same original. PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Is it S - diff? Grad C: Yep. Postdoc E: Mmm. PhD A: Something like that, um, but operating on these lattices that are really what's behind this {disfmarker} uh, this annotation format. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: So {disfmarker} Grad C: There's actually a diff library you can use {pause} to do things like that that {disfmarker} so you have different formats. PhD F: You could definitely do that with the {disfmarker} PhD A: So somewhere in the API you would like to have like a merge or some {disfmarker} some function that merges two {disfmarker} two versions. Grad C: Yeah, I think it's gonna be very hard. Any sort of structured anything when you try to merge is really, really hard PhD A: Right. Grad C: because you ha i The hard part isn't the file format. The hard part is specifying what you mean by" merge" . PhD A: Is {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: And that's very difficult. PhD F: But the one thing that would work here actually for i that is more reliable than the utterances is the {disfmarker} the speaker ons and offs. So if you have a good, Grad C: But this is exactly what I mean, is that {disfmarker} that the problem i PhD F: um {disfmarker} Yeah. You just have to know wha what to tie it to. Grad C: Yeah, exactly. The problem is saying" what are the semantics, PhD F: And {disfmarker} Grad C: what do you mean by" merge" ?" PhD F: Right, right. PhD A: Right. So {disfmarker} so just to let you know what we {disfmarker} where we kluged it by, uh, doing {disfmarker} uh, by doing {disfmarker} Hhh. Grad C: So. PhD A: Both were based on words, so, bo we have two versions of the same words intersp you know, sprinkled with {disfmarker} with different tags for annotations. Grad C: And then you did diff. PhD A: And we did diff. Exactly! Grad C: Yeah, that's just what I thought. PhD A: And that's how {disfmarker} Grad C: That's just wh how I would have done it. PhD A: Yeah. But, you know, it had lots of errors and things would end up in the wrong order, and so forth. Uh, so, um, if you had a more {disfmarker} Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Uh, it {disfmarker} it was a kluge because it was basically reducing everything to {disfmarker} uh, to {disfmarker} uh, uh, to textual alignment. Grad C: A textual {disfmarker} PhD A: Um, so {disfmarker} PhD F: But, d isn't that something where whoever {disfmarker} if {vocalsound} {disfmarker} if the people who are making changes, say in the transcripts, cuz this all happened when the transcripts were different {disfmarker} ye um, if they tie it to something, like if they tied it to the acoustic segment {disfmarker} if they {disfmarker} You know what I mean? Then {disfmarker} Or if they tied it to an acoustic segment and we had the time - marks, that would help. Grad C: Yep. PhD F: But the problem is exactly as Adam said, that you get, you know, y you don't have that information or it's lost in the merge somehow, Postdoc E: Well, can I ask one question? PhD F: so {disfmarker} Postdoc E: It {disfmarker} it seems to me that, um, we will have o an official version of the corpus, which will be only one {disfmarker} one version in terms of the words {disfmarker} where the words are concerned. We'd still have the {disfmarker} the merging issue maybe if coding were done independently of the {disfmarker} PhD A: And you're gonna get that Postdoc E: But {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} PhD A: because if the data gets out, people will do all kinds of things to it. And, uh, s you know, several years from now you might want to look into, um, the prosody of referring expressions. And someone at the university of who knows where has annotated the referring expressions. So you want to get that annotation and bring it back in line with your data. Grad C: Right. PhD A: OK? Grad C: But unfortunately they've also hand - edited it. Postdoc E: OK, then {disfmarker} PhD F: But they've also {disfmarker} Exactly. And so that's exactly what we should {disfmarker} somehow when you distribute the data, say that {disfmarker} you know, that {disfmarker} have some way of knowing how to merge it back in and asking people to try to do that. PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: Yep. PhD A: Right. Postdoc E: Well, then the {disfmarker} PhD D: What's {disfmarker} what's wrong with {pause} doing times? I {disfmarker} Postdoc E: I agree. That was what I was wondering. PhD F: Uh, yeah, time is the {disfmarker} Grad C: Well, Postdoc E: Time is unique. You were saying that you didn't think we should {disfmarker} PhD F: Time is passing! PhD A: Time {disfmarker} time {disfmarker} times are ephemeral. Postdoc E: Andreas was saying {disfmarker} Yeah. Grad C: what if they haven't notated with them, times? PhD F: Yeah. He {disfmarker} he's a language modeling person, though. PhD A: Um {disfmarker} Grad C: So {disfmarker} so imagine {disfmarker} I think his {disfmarker} his example is a good one. Imagine that this person who developed the corpus of the referring expressions didn't include time. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad C: He included references to words. Postdoc E: Ach! PhD A: Yeah. Grad C: He said that at this word is when {disfmarker} when it happened. Postdoc E: Well, then {disfmarker} PhD A: Or she. Grad C: Or she. Postdoc E: But then couldn't you just indirectly figure out the time {pause} tied to the word? PhD F: But still they {disfmarker} Exactly. Grad C: Sure. But what if {disfmarker} what if they change the words? PhD F: Yeah. Postdoc E: Not {disfmarker} Well, but you'd have some anchoring point. He couldn't have changed all the words. PhD D: But can they change the words without changing the time of the word? Grad C: Sure. But they could have changed it a little. The {disfmarker} the point is, that {disfmarker} that they may have annotated it off a word transcript that isn't the same as our word transcript, so how do you merge it back in? I understand what you're saying. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Grad C: And I {disfmarker} I guess the answer is, um, it's gonna be different every time. It's j it's just gonna be {disfmarker} Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Yeah. Grad C: I it's exactly what I said before, PhD F: You only know the boundaries of the {disfmarker} Grad C: which is that" what do you mean by" merge" ?" So in this case where you have the words and you don't have the times, well, what do you mean by" merge" ? If you tell me what you mean, I can write a program to do it. PhD F: Right. Right. You can merge at the level of the representation that the other person preserved and that's it. Grad C: Right. And that's about all you can do. PhD F: And beyond that, all you know is {disfmarker} is relative ordering and sometimes even that is wrong. Grad C: So {disfmarker} so in {disfmarker} so in this one you would have to do a best match between the word sequences, PhD F: So. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Grad C: extract the times f from the best match of theirs to yours, and use that. PhD F: And then infer that their time - marks are somewhere in between. Grad C: Right. PhD F: Yeah, exactly. Postdoc E: But it could be that they just {disfmarker} uh, I mean, it could be that they chunked {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they lost certain utterances and all that stuff, Grad C: Right, exactly. So it could get very, very ugly. Postdoc E: or {disfmarker} PhD F: Definitely. Postdoc E: Yeah. PhD F: Definitely. Alright. Postdoc E: That's interesting. PhD F: Well, I guess, w I {disfmarker} I didn't want to keep people too long and Adam wanted t people {disfmarker} I'll read the digits. If anyone else offers to, that'd be great. And PhD A: Ah, well. Grad C: Yeah. PhD F: if not, I guess {disfmarker} PhD A: For th for the {disfmarker} {nonvocalsound} for the benefit of science we'll read the digits. Grad C: More digits, the better. OK, this is PhD F: Thanks {disfmarker} thanks a lot. It's really helpful. I mean, Adam and Don {nonvocalsound} will sort of meet and I think that's great. Very useful. Go next. PhD D: Scratch that. Postdoc E: O three Grad C: Oh, right.

Meeting participants wanted to agree upon a standard database to link up different components of the transcripts. The current idea was to use an XML script, but it quickly seemed that other options, like a pfile or ATLAS, are more suitable. The reason being that they would make it easier to deal with different linguistic units, like frames and utterances. Eventually, the team was skeptical of using something that would be hard to learn, like ATLAS. Nonetheless, they wanted to explore their options. The meeting finished with some discussion about handling annotations.

tr-sq-69

tr-sq-69_0

Summarize the discussion of group warming and the introduction to the new remote control project. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Mutual greeting heralded the beginning of the meeting and the goal of the new remote control project was introduced by Project Manager to the conferees as to win over competitive products by being original, trendy and user-friendly. Then Project Manager continued with the introduction of the design process, which was divided into three main parts--functional design, conceptual design and desired design that respectively focused on the user-related technical functions, desirable user interface and different trends involved, and specific implementation and choice-detailing process of conceptual design.

tr-sq-70

tr-sq-70_0

What did Project Manager recommend to do after introducing the design steps and why? User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Project Manager recommended a drawing activity of conferees'favourite animals with the aim of inspiring and contributing to the design process of the remote control.

tr-sq-71

tr-sq-71_0

Summarize the discussion of specific designing requirements of the new remote control. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Given the customer demand and conferees personal experiences, several designing requirements were proposed during the discussion. The remote control was decided to be adaptable to multiple devices with few buttons, be able to be lighted in the dark and held in hand, and be both water-proof and shock-proof along with a whistle tracking system, based on which advantage over competitors might well be gained at the price of a rising production cost.

tr-sq-72

tr-sq-72_0

What did Project Manager's think of the water-proof design when discussing the designing requirements of the new remote control? User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Considering the product originality, Project Manager believed that a water-proof remote control could be used in the bath conveniently while saving the customer's need to purchase an extra plastic cover. Therefore, originality and competitiveness might be gained over competitive products.

tr-sq-73

tr-sq-73_0

What did the conferees think of the solution to water-proof and shock-proof technical demands when discussing the designing requirements of the new remote control? User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Conferees agreed that the remote control could be sold with optional plastic protection and water-proof box for customers to choose.

tr-sq-74

tr-sq-74_0

What did Industrial Designer and Project Manager think of the remote tracking method when discussing the designing requirements of the new remote control? User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

Industrial Designer first recommended adding a special beeping button on the TV set to remind users of where the remote controls were, but the plan was deemed impractical concerning TV sets that were not designed by them. Then Project Manager suggested whistle tracking and was approved by all the conferees as an original improvement.

tr-gq-75

tr-gq-75_0

Summarize the whole meeting. User Interface: {gap} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} How do you wear this thing? Project Manager: Hmm. Mm mm mm. {vocalsound} User Interface: Not too many cables and stuff. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Original. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Is recorded? Okay? Okay so welcome everyone. So we are here for the kickoff meeting of uh the process of designing a new remote control. So I will first start with a warm welcome opening {vocalsound} stuff, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: then uh we will uh see what will be uh our product and what will be the different step we will have to design it. And uh then we will uh discuss if we have few ideas and we will uh end uh by uh dispatching the different task you will be {disfmarker} you will have to fulfil to complete this process. So {disfmarker} User Interface: Uh. Just one thing. Uh, you said twenty-five minutes, but I have something else to do uh, so gotta have another meeting uh soon, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so maybe you could hurry up a bit {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} sorry? User Interface: It's true. I have another meeting so if you could uh {disfmarker} Project Manager: You have another meeting soon? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So you have to be quick. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, for the lawnmower project. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the the goal is to have a remote control so to have an advantage over our competitors we have to be original, we have to be trendy and we have to also try to be user-friendly. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: So uh the design step will be divided in three uh main points. First it will be the functional design. Third is the conceptual design and then is the desired design. So the functional design is to identify the main user needs, the technical function the remote control should fulfil. And then we will move to f conceptual design where we'll specify the different component involved, what kind of user interf interface we want and what are the different uh trend in user interface and stuff like that. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And then the desired devi design will consist in uh specifically implementing {vocalsound} and detailing the choice we've uh made in the second point. So I will now ask you which is very important for the design of a new remote control for to uh each of us to to draw uh your favourite animal on the white board. User Interface: {vocalsound} What an original idea. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you have any idea of which animal you want to show us? {vocalsound} User Interface: Orangutan. Project Manager: Okay {vocalsound} that's good. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: No no n Project Manager: {vocalsound} n n {gap} User Interface: Can I give you the Project Manager: You should {disfmarker} User Interface: {disfmarker} no? But I don't have to say anything. When I'm drawing the orangutan. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} If you want to react uh about this wonderful drawing uh {vocalsound} I'll let you uh comment. User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: It's an abstract drawing of an orangutan. Project Manager: Okay it's an abstract drawing. User Interface: Yes. Project Manager: I think it's nice and original. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You should write y the name I think. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: I don't have a red colour. Usually orangutans have red hair so this is a very important but I don't have red pen, so {disfmarker} Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes. Project Manager: You want to draw something Christine? {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Okay uh sorry. You have to imagine a little bit {vocalsound} um. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: This {disfmarker} Project Manager: Of course your animal is recorded so it's not lost. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Sorry too {vocalsound} uh. User Interface: Yes. I know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Is this uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Wha what is this strange beast? Marketing: Is it beautiful? {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: Is it a monster? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Do you know? It's a cat. User Interface: It's a cat? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Isn't it? {vocalsound} User Interface: I thought these things did not exist. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Yes yes Industrial Designer: Me {vocalsound} Marketing: is it {disfmarker} like that. User Interface: Ah yeah {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Is it better? Project Manager: Ah okay it's pretty. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay it's your cat. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} It's my cat. User Interface: Does have a name? Marketing: {vocalsound} Yeah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: The name is Caramel. User Interface: Caramel. Ah-ha. Industrial Designer: Caramel. Marketing: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Olivier, do you want to {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And you {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I think I'm too short for the cables. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay I go, but next time you'll do something I'm sure. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I'm a bit short on cable. User Interface: Next time I concentrate. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So what could I draw? {vocalsound} Maybe I can draw like a very simplified cow. {vocalsound} I don't know if it looks like a cow {vocalsound} User Interface: He looks like a bong. Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Like a what? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Sorry. No. Industrial Designer: Quite squarey. User Interface: Scary? Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: He also. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: I dunno it it looks more like a donkey in fact {vocalsound} I would say. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} I I think we will be finished this uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Okay so I hope that it helps you uh in the process of designing a remote control. User Interface: Is it for uh for putting a {disfmarker} for logos, no. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Let's move on. So {disfmarker} Here the uh financial objective of our project. That is to say to to have a production cost lower than twelve point five Euros and have a selling price of twice that price t in order to target a profe profit of uh fifty uh million Euros. User Interface: I is there a matter for a new remote control? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah if it's trendy, original I d fulfil the user needs. User Interface: Is it uh a single device remote control or is it a multi-device remote control? Project Manager: We have to discuss that point. User Interface: Ah Project Manager: On {disfmarker} User Interface: this is not defined at all? Project Manager: yeah you you can suggest points like this. So what what {disfmarker} User Interface: Ah, okay. Project Manager: so we have to decide for example if it can control one device or multiple. So what's {disfmarker} what are your ideas about that? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe I can have the {disfmarker} your opinion from the marketing side? User Interface: Well uh do we sell other stuff? Uh if if we bundle the remote control with something uh to sell then it could be a single device, otherwise it could be programmable one otherwise who would buy a remote control from us. Project Manager: Okay, so if it selled uh by its own i it it would rather be for multiple device. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Do you agree? Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Yeah. So maybe it should be for multiple devices. And uh do you have any ideas um of uh design ideas or any uh uh technical requirement we we should uh fulfil? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I think we shouldn't have too many b for my part. I think {disfmarker} User Interface: No, I couldn I cannot fi think of any requirements right now. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: If we don't have so many buttons could be nice. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Few buttons. Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And do you have it also to be {disfmarker} to be lighted in order to be used in the dark? Might be a good idea. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. And do you have any um any uh idea of the trend {disfmarker} the trend in domain, what it shouldn't {disfmarker} it should look like, or things like that? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Something which is not squarey maybe uh, not a box. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: With rou okay. Like for {disfmarker} okay. User Interface: Something like that, least fits in your hand. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The basic requirement. Project Manager: So. Fit in your hand, yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Only a buck. Project Manager: And also it have, i it may be {vocalsound} it may be important for the remote control to be uh {disfmarker} To, to resist to various shocks that can happen if it fall. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Waterproof. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Water-proof as well. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I think we should have a device {disfmarker} Project Manager: Maybe it is original because you can uh use it in your uh {disfmarker} in your bath whereas the others can't. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe water-proof would be very original. Industrial Designer: Sorry. {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Havin having a water-proof remote control so that the people can uh use it in their bath. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: That could be uh {disfmarker} User Interface: B it seems uh so, but uh if you don't have an waterproof remote control it means you can just cover it with some plastic and you can sort of f Project Manager: Yeah but, it is still something uh you have to buy and that is um not maybe very {disfmarker} User Interface: And, and that's one of the {disfmarker} that's one of the shock {disfmarker} I mean there are people that have a remote control and they are worried that it's going to break and they put some extra plastic around it. Project Manager: Yeah, mayb B User Interface: That's people {gap} they actually do it themselves. Project Manager: But maybe we can bulk it with uh already this plastic thing and uh the waterproof uh stuff as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} directly. User Interface: I it will look a bulky in that case. Project Manager: Yeah. Maybe we can sell uh all that together, so so plastic protection and uh and a waterproof box as well. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: That might be good uh track to follow. User Interface: Like as an optional thing. Project Manager: Optional or selled with it? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} And I I think we should have something, most of the time I I lose my remote control. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: We should have s uh special bu button on the T_V_ to make the remote control beeping. Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh {disfmarker} But we don't design the T_V_. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Maybe we can have uh something you whistle and uh the remote control uh beep. Industrial Designer: Ah yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Barks. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah, barks, yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Barks. Project Manager: So we can uh have a whistle uh remote control? Industrial Designer: Yeah. Yeah whistle. Project Manager: I don't know, whistle-able? {vocalsound} Th Industrial Designer: Whistle tracking. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Whistle tracking yeah. Whistle tracking remote control. That's a good idea, that's very original and that's can uh improve. User Interface: {vocalsound} That's that's quite cool, but uh of course we {disfmarker} you don't normally need uh any audio uh recording stuff on your remote control right? Project Manager: Yeah d d uh. User Interface: So i it's just going to add t to the cost. Project Manager: Yeah but s still we have to mm we have to {vocalsound} have an advantage over our competitors. I think this is a good advantage. User Interface: {vocalsound} It's cool. I think I like the idea, but I'm not sure about the what you, Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask {disfmarker} User Interface: who is giving {disfmarker} who's giving who's giving our budget. Who's {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. We have to ask the quest of that's uh design to the uh Industrial um Designer. User Interface: Yeah. Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {vocalsound} yeah {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Which is you. User Interface:'Kay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay so try to find that for next meeting. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. So next meeting is in thirty minutes or so uh. {vocalsound} Don't pani. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Don't panic. {vocalsound} Project Manager: So so I will ask the Industrial Designer to find out more about this industrial design so any working {disfmarker} any working function we have discussed. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So then I will ask the User Interf Interface Designer to to think about the point we discussed like the number of buttons, the the fact that is lighted or not, things like that, and what would be convenient for the user. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And also um {vocalsound} I will ask the Market Expert to uh try to find out what are the absolute requirements, what is absolutely needed in a remote control uh for the user. So. And then uh I will uh just ask you to think about that and uh look at your mail because you will receive uh some good advice soon. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: So. Thank you I think that's all for this point. User Interface: Good. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thank you {vocalsound} User Interface: Uh, so we come back in five minutes? Half an hour. Project Manager: Anyway you will receive some messages. {vocalsound} Be careful. You eat it? Does it move uh? Okay, but I don't know if it uh is still correctly uh {disfmarker} We'll see. Industrial Designer: Ah. {gap}

This meeting was primarily concerned with the design process and specific designing requirements of the remote control. Project Manager first introduced the goal of the new remote control project as to be original, trendy and user-friendly so as to bear an advantage over competitive products. Then three steps of the design process were respectively introduced and explained by Project Manager, and drawings of favourite animals then followed as an imagination-inspiring activity. According to Project Manager, the fifty-million-Euro financial objective of the project would be achieved at a production cost lower than 12. 5 Euros and a twofold selling price. Competitiveness-endowing requirements for remote control design were then proposed and carefully discussed.

tr-sq-76

tr-sq-76_0

What did the group discuss about differences of care provision in different parts of Wales? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan insisted that they were aware that different local authorities actually had adopted different patterns of providing early education. And with the Flying Start programme being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities, they knew that there was a variance throughout Wales. Then they would like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. And It was demand-led and universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, so they believed the programme should be available to everybody.

tr-sq-77

tr-sq-77_0

What did Janet Finch-Saunders think of childcare when discussing differences of care provision in different parts of Wales? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

The Welsh and UK Governments had followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents, which was a mistake and should be more universally available. The demand-driven approach was based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. It was hard for children to mix with peers from different backgrounds and age groups? Next, some areas had traditionally got more childcare anyway because they had traditionally more demand in those areas, so there was not a level playing field to start from.

tr-sq-78

tr-sq-78_0

What's the conclusion of the discussion about differences of care provision in different parts of Wales? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

The team was aware that different local authorities actually had adopted different patterns of providing early education. And with the Flying Start programme being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities, they knew that there was a variance throughout Wales. Next some of their care provision was universally available in certain areas. Then historically, that was definitely true, and they were certainly planning to expand it, developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. Finally they had got the system of inspection to ensure that.

tr-sq-79

tr-sq-79_0

Summarize the discussion about the demand-driven approach in the programme. Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Janet Finch-Saunders believed that the Welsh and UK Governments had followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents, so there was not a level playing field to start from. However, Julie Morgan insisted that some of their provision was universally available in certain areas. Hence historically that was definitely true of the programme. Then they were certainly planning to expand the programme, which is believed to be a demand-led approach. Last they were managing it within the normal budgetary process, developing a more integrated approach towards the early years, and had got the system of inspection to ensure that.

tr-sq-80

tr-sq-80_0

What's the decision of the discussion about the demand-driven approach in the programme? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan insisted that some of their provision was universally available in certain areas. Hence historically that was definitely true of the programme. Then they were certainly planning to expand the programme, which is believed to be a demand-led approach. Last they were managing it within the normal budgetary process, developing a more integrated approach towards the early years, and had got the system of inspection to ensure that.

tr-sq-81

tr-sq-81_0

What did Julie Morgan recommend to do when discussing the demand-driven approach in the programme and why? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan certainly plans to expand the programme, which is believed to be a demand-led approach. Last they were managing it within the normal budgetary process, developing a more integrated approach towards the early years, and had got the system of inspection to ensure that. Because some of their provision was universally available in certain areas. Hence historically that was definitely true of the programme.

tr-sq-82

tr-sq-82_0

Summarize the discussion about the demand of Welsh language skills. Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan thought the demand was very important, and they were pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer were in Welsh or bilingual settings, so that they established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and played workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. But Suzy Davies thought that just on this early point, anybody who had been through the Welsh education system which is 20 years now, would have Welsh language skills obviously to differing degrees. Next, Nicola Edwards alleged that it was not necessarily appropriate for teaching language to children, because they might be coming from families who didn't use Welsh at home, but it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way.

tr-sq-83

tr-sq-83_0

What did Nicola Edwards think of the need of teaching language when discussing the demand of Welsh language skills? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Nicola Edwards alleged that it was not necessarily appropriate for teaching language to children, because they might be coming from families who didn't use Welsh at home, but it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way.

tr-sq-84

tr-sq-84_0

What did Julie Morgan recommend to do when discussing the demand of Welsh language skills and why? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan recommended to believe the demand was very important, and to establish a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in childcare and played workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. And also she agreed on Nicola Edwards's idea that they should have a stakeholder group where they had brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors.

tr-sq-85

tr-sq-85_0

Summarize the discussion about the issues with HMRC. Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Sian Gwenllian pointed out that the issues with HMRC had come to light that had made the team suspended the programme for the HMRC would have put limits on that. Julie Morgan answered that in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister had to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. For instance this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, which would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, they wanted something more flexible. Nicola Edwards also agreed that the technical issues with HMRC for HMRC did provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme. Jo-Anne Daniels finally came to the conclusion that they could deliver a cheaper system with flexibility that the Deputy Minister had referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC.

tr-sq-86

tr-sq-86_0

What did Julie Morgan think of the issues with HMRC? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Julie Morgan thought that in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister had to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing the programme. For instance this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, which would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, they wanted something more flexible.

tr-sq-87

tr-sq-87_0

What's the decision of the discussion about the issues with HMRC? Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Jo-Anne Daniels finally came to the conclusion that they could deliver a cheaper system with flexibility that the Deputy Minister had referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. At the moment, the extra cost would be about PS2. 5 million, which according to their initial estimate suggested that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC.

tr-gq-88

tr-gq-88_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Lynne Neagle AM: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received no apologies for absence this morning. Can I ask if there are any declarations of interest from Members, please? No. Okay. Thank you. Item 3 this morning then is a scrutiny session on early childhood education and care, and I'm very pleased to welcome Julie Morgan AM, Deputy Minister for Health and Social Services; Jo-anne Daniels, director of communities and tackling poverty at Welsh Government; and Nicola Edwards, deputy director of the childcare, play and early years division in Welsh Government. Thank you all for your attendance. We're very much looking forward to the session. If you're happy, we'll go straight into questions, and the first ones are from Hefin David. Hefin David AM: Good morning, Deputy Minister. What are your primary objectives? Is it supporting the development of children or getting parents into work? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think you'll be aware from the range of programmes that we've got that we do feel it's important to support both children and parents. There's obviously lots of evidence to show how important the early years are for children, how important they are for their development, and so, that is one of our primary objectives. But we also know how important it is for parents to have stable jobs, reasonably paid, so that can also help with the development of the children. So, we really see it that our plans are for both parents and children, and we believe that a high-quality, early-childhood education and care system can provide that. And, of course, in terms of when we talk about jobs as well, I think it's really important to remember that the childcare system is a big employer as well and a very important employer. So that, actually, itself provides jobs. Hefin David AM: So, the evidence we've seen suggests that, historically, Governments in the UK and devolved have focused on primarily getting parents into work. So, are you suggesting then that your focus is to change that and move towards early child development? Julie Morgan AM: No, what I'm saying is that we want to give parents the opportunity to work. We don't want childcare to be a barrier to parents working because we think that working is one the best routes out of poverty, but we do also want to make sure that children have the greatest experience that they can have in the early years. So, we see it as one. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's quite a policy challenge to deliver both at the same time. Julie Morgan AM: The situation as it is is complex, and I think it needs simplifying. It is a challenge, but it's probably one of the most important challenges we've got in Government, because what we offer to families with young children is one of the most important things we do. Hefin David AM: And in your evidence to the committee, you said that the Welsh Government's approach'will build on a wide variety of programmes that are continually developing in order to support parents, families and children during the early years.'And you've just said you want to simplify that. How do you simplify that, particularly with regard to the provision of funding and the way these things connect from the birth of a child into school? How will simplification look, and what will happen? Julie Morgan AM: Well, we're not at the stage of being able to say what it will look like at the moment, but we're looking at ways of simplifying, because I think it's absolutely right, it is a very complex system, because it's grown up from all different routes. But we are having lots of pilot projects that are looking at ways of simplifying the system. We have got pathway projects in, I think it's eight local authorities, who are looking at ways of joining up the whole system. So, we are looking at that, and I absolutely except that it is very complex and we want to find ways of making it simpler and easier to understand. So, we are working with local authorities and health boards to see how we can actually work together and simplify things. Hefin David AM: And it's good to hear that that's your objective. Can I just come back to the first thing you said:'We can't say yet what we're going to do'? Julie Morgan AM: No. Hefin David AM: So, when will we have a policy plan and something that we can interrogate in more detail? Julie Morgan AM: Well, I think we are near getting to an announcement where we will be able to say what direction we're going in, and because we have had--. Some of this work has been going on for a year or so, and we're getting the results of those pathfinder projects coming in. So, when we do have all those results, we will be able to say the direction that we want to go in, and I hope we'll be able to do that very soon. Hefin David AM: Before Christmas? Julie Morgan AM: I hope so. Hefin David AM: Okay. And finally from me-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm sorry I can't say too much about that because we haven't actually--. We need to--. Hefin David AM: Well, it does sound like something is imminent. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. Hefin David AM: Okay. And that's as far as you're willing to go. And if that's as far as you're willing to go, then I'll stop asking. Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a supplementary from Sian. Hefin David AM: Okay. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, that's fine. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to understand a little about the pilot, the pathfinders in eight local authority areas. Is the focus there on the child or is it on parents returning to work? Julie Morgan AM: The focus is on an early years system, but we've worked both locally and nationally. So, it's looking at both. I mean, actually, I think, perhaps, Nicola, would you like to or one of you like to describe one of the programmes? Sian Gwenllian AM: And can you just explain the vision? Is it a child-centred early years provision that we're thinking of in these pathfinder--? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, in'Prosperity for All', we set out that early years was one of the key priority areas, and within that we said that we wanted to create a more joined-up and more responsive system. So, when we talk about a system, we're talking about the services that are provided by health boards, so health visiting, midwifery, speech and language support, other kinds of therapeutic services, as well as all the important services that local authorities are providing, such as support for parenting, advice and guidance, employment support and childcare, obviously. And we've got eight pathfinders. I'll try and remember each of them. So, Flintshire, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Neath Port Talbot, Swansea, Ceredigion, Pembrokeshire--and then I've missed one, I think, because I've only got to seven--who have been working with us to look at how all of those services are currently delivered in their local area and whether and how they can reorganise those services to improve accessibility, to improve take-up, but essentially to improve the efficacy of those programmes in terms of supporting children, but often, obviously, in supporting children you have to support parents too and support the home. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, would you say it's a child-centred approach? Jo-Anne Daniels: Absolutely, because it's about making sure that we deliver the best start in life for children in Wales, but obviously parents are a critical element of that, so can't be excluded. Lynne Neagle AM: And how long have they been going for? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, those eight pathfinders started their work in--I think it was--February this year. And they're still in the very early stages in terms of actually unpicking and mapping the current provision of services across their areas and then moving on to the stage where they'll develop proposals for how they might change the delivery of early years. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Julie. Julie Morgan AM: Just to say also, the one in Flintshire is also testing the impact of consistent funding rates for education and childcare. So, that's been going longer than the others. So, that's another important area because there's an evaluation of that project under way at the moment. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: Sorry, but Caerphilly was the one that I forgot to mention. Lynne Neagle AM: Oh dear. [Laughter. ] Hefin David AM: That's absolutely unforgivable. [Laughter. ] Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. [Laughter. ] Julie Morgan AM: Very significant. Hefin David AM: In your report, the'Alignment of the Childcare Offer for Wales to the Foundation Phase', one of the recommendations was that'The Welsh Government, local authority education and childcare policy and delivery teams could merge'. So, looking behind the scenes, those disparate parts of policy, delivering the foundation phase and childcare offer should merge. Is that the case? Has that been put under way and should we be looking at this structure in more depth? Julie Morgan AM: Well, probably not at the structure at this time because the report that you're referring to was looking at the first year of the delivery of the childcare offer and it did make a number of points, which we have taken on board. For example, we issued guidance last year regarding the delivery of the foundation phase, which supports widening the number of non-maintained settings that are able to deliver early education and we're also supporting co-location and partnership working between education and childcare providers through our capital investment programme. I think it's about PS81 million that we put into the capital investment where we are developing childcare facilities co-located with the education facilities, because that was one of the things that came out from this report you're referring to. And, I mean, obviously, early years is one of the key priorities within'Prosperity for All'and, obviously, education sits within one portfolio with the Minister for Education, and childcare is with me. But we're doing what we can to work together to try to bring those together, and that was one of the proposals in that report. But it's still very early to think about, at this stage, a structural change. Hefin David AM: And I remember when you were on the committee here with me, sitting next to me, we had those discussions about co-location. I know the problem with not having co-location is that you could end up seeing a child travelling between three or more locations during the course of a day. Are you suggesting now that the actions you're taking will resolve that issue universally, or will it lead to a piecemeal resolution? And, if so, to what extent, what percentage of children will see that resolved as an issue? Julie Morgan AM: Certainly, the co-location is not going to solve it universally because although we've been able to develop a lot of new facilities, or build on old facilities, there will be a lot of areas that we won't have covered. So, I can't say that there's going to be a situation where everything is going to be co-located because I don't think that would be feasible, and, for some of the providers, they wouldn't be in a position to move to a school. But ideally it's a good situation, but, certainly, I think the discussions that there were on the committee, it's not ideal to take children for long distances between different providers, let alone the effect it has on the climate change issue. It's whether it's good for children as well. So, I can't say that they will ever be co-located, but as I said in response to your earlier question, we are encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, which, obviously, is quite significant. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. I've got some questions now from Janet Finch-Saunders. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Thank you, Chair. What is the Welsh Government doing to address the big differences in the amount of early childhood education and care provision available in different parts of Wales? Julie Morgan AM: Right. Well, thank you very much for that question. I mean, obviously, it would be good to see a greater degree of consistency, but I think it's important to acknowledge that there are reasons for that variation. Now, early education, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Education, and we are aware that different local authorities have adopted different patterns of providing early education. For example, local authorities are funded to provide 10 hours minimum of the foundation phase for three and four-year-olds across Wales, but there's quite a variance in how much is actually provided, with some local authorities providing a lot more historically. So, it does mean that there is a different pattern across Wales, according to what local authorities do. But what I could say is, of course, the quality is very good, as the Estyn reports have shown; that the quality provided, the delivery of the foundation phase, is very good. But it does vary in terms of what is offered throughout Wales, and that is the decision of the local authorities, and it is a historical thing. I refer to this pilot in Flint, which is trying to test paying the same rate for foundation phase and childcare. We're going to have an independent evaluation on that soon, in November this year, so that will help us. Obviously, I think local authorities'role in all this is absolutely crucial because they are the local, nearest people to decide how things develop in their own areas. And then, of course, we've got Flying Start, which is geographically targeted, which uses the data from income benefit to decide which are the areas where that is being delivered. And that is delivered where the highest proportion of children aged nought to three are living in income-dependent households. So, again, that determines the pattern throughout Wales. With Flying Start being geographically targeted, with the education being determined by the local authorities about how much there is, we know that there is a variance throughout Wales. We'd like to see facilities developed in each local authority throughout Wales that would answer the needs of the families and the children in those areas. Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, Janet, Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just in terms of the foundation phase, there have been cuts, of course, in expenditure in that phase. How concerned are you about that and the impact that that will have on the way in which the foundation phase is taught in our schools? The foundation phase is now part of the education improvement grant, which has seen a reduction of 10 per cent, and it has to compete against other expenditure streams within that greater pot of funding. So, are you concerned that money is being lost and that that will have an impact on standards in the foundation phase? Julie Morgan AM: I haven't seen any evidence. Obviously, I must reiterate the foundation phase does come under the Minister for Education, but I haven't seen any evidence of any standards being lowered, and the reports from Estyn are very good. In fact, I think the foundation phase is one of our great joys, that we absolutely celebrate it, and so I'd be very concerned if I thought there was any drop in standards in the foundation phase, and I certainly haven't had any evidence of that. I would want to guard against that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Exactly, but if there are fewer teaching assistants in the system because of the cuts, it's going to impact on standards, at the end of the day. Julie Morgan AM: I think we have to be very careful to see that lower standards are not implemented, because it was groundbreaking when we brought it in, and it has proved to be a great success, so we want to make sure that's guarded. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Going back to my original question about the big differences in amounts of early childhood education and care provision in different parts of Wales, the Welsh and UK Governments have followed a demand-driven approach to the childcare market, with subsidies mainly given to working parents. Is that a mistake? Should it be more universally available? Julie Morgan AM: Well, some of our provision is universally available in certain areas. For example, the Flying Start provision is universally available in geographically defined areas, and I think that's very important, because that does mean that there isn't stigma, and so, in those areas, everybody can take advantage of it, and yet it is reaching those who are most in need because it's reaching those areas. So, I think that there is a purpose behind that. In terms of when you say demand led, could you elaborate on that? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: I know that--we've just had a useful briefing from David Dallimore, and, basically, there is this theory that there are too many resources--the demand-driven approach is based more on certain factors: geographic spread in terms of it being more universal, and whether that's the right way. How do children then mix with peers from different backgrounds, in their own peer or age group? Julie Morgan AM: It is demand-- Nicola Edwards: [Inaudible. ]--because the offer is targeted at working parents-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes, yes. Nicola Edwards: --obviously, then the amount of availability is based on how many parents apply for it and take it up. Is that the context of demand led in that-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Nicola Edwards: Right, okay. Julie Morgan AM: It is universally available to all parents who meet the eligibility criteria of working, and I think what you're saying is that it should be available to everybody. Lynne Neagle AM: I think the point that Janet's making is that some areas have traditionally got more childcare anyway because they have traditionally had more demand in those areas, so there's not a level playing field to start from. Is that correct? Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Yes. Julie Morgan AM: I think that, historically, that is definitely true, and when you look at the take-up of the childcare offer, it's certainly taken up in some areas with a very high take-up rate. I think Ynys Mon was nearly 90 per cent or something-- Sian Gwenllian AM: They need more money, because they haven't got enough funding. Dawn Bowden AM: So does everywhere. Sian Gwenllian AM: No, to meet the demand. Julie Morgan AM: In other areas, it's much, much lower--in some of the cities, I know. So, there is a big range in take-up-- Janet Finch-Saunders AM: So, do you intend to bring something forward to address that? Julie Morgan AM: We are planning to extend it. We're looking at the possibility of extending it to parents who are in education and training. So, we are widening the offer, yes. Obviously, we have to wait for the evaluation of that. It would be great to be able to offer it to absolutely everybody, but obviously we have got the finance to look at in terms of how we do that. But we are certainly planning to expand it. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got questions on the offer in a little while. Janet. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: Does the Welsh Government intend to develop an integrated approach, then, against all settings? If so, given the current inconsistencies, how can quality be assured? Julie Morgan AM: We are developing a more integrated approach towards the early years. As I've said, we're trying to have the foundation phase operating in more non-maintained settings, and we're already developing that. But Estyn and CIW will continue to inspect and regulate the early years sector to ensure standards, and, since January 2019, CIW and Estyn have moved to joint inspections for the non-maintained settings that are offering the foundation phase. So, that is a very positive move, I think, and is absolutely making sure that standards are maintained, because if we are having the foundation phase in non-maintained settings, that is a challenge where we want to be sure that the standards and the philosophy of the foundation phase are maintained. So, we have got the system of inspection to ensure that. Janet Finch-Saunders AM: And finally from me, what specific steps have been put in place to take forward the commitments from the Welsh Government's 2017 childcare/play early years workforce plan to build a better understanding of the workforce's Welsh language skills to enable support for the sector to be targeted and to identify where capacity needs to be built for the future to meet the needs of the early years sector in a bilingual Wales? Julie Morgan AM: We think this is very important, and we're pleased that 29 per cent of children taking up the childcare offer are in Welsh or bilingual settings, so we think that's very good. We have established a specific programme to develop Welsh language skills in the childcare and play workforce with the National Centre for Learning Welsh, to develop workplace Welsh language skills across the sector. So, we're actually working with that, and I think you've done something with those recently, haven't you? I don't know if you want to-- Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, we have a stakeholder group where we've brought together a variety of people with an interest in the early years, childcare and play sectors, and we had a presentation just last month from the national language centre about the education programmes that they're rolling out, and how this is all coming together, which is quite interesting. We've been working quite carefully to make sure that the variety of work-based learning programmes that we provide and offer are also available in Welsh and bilingually. Recruitment and retention within the childcare and play sector is quite challenging in any case. Recruiting and retaining staff with really good Welsh language skills adds an extra dimension to it, and that it's a point that Mudiad Meithrin makes to us quite regularly, that they do struggle to find staff with the right skills. So, upskilling the existing workforce is a key part of it, but also doing more to attract people in with Welsh language skills in the first place in terms of the training courses that we're taking forward, and thinking about that in the context of the targets within Cymraeg 2050 and the aim to get to one million Welsh speakers. So, as the Deputy Minister said, we've got quite a number of children accessing the offer in Welsh-medium or bilingual settings at the moment. We're going to be doing some baselining work against that in terms of local authorities'Welsh in education strategic plans and education places, and what we can then do to increase the number of childcare places in parallel with that so that you can make sure that you start that pathway through learning Welsh, interacting with education and childcare through Welsh at a much earlier stage. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Just on this early point, anybody who's been through the Welsh education system, which is 20 years now, will have some Welsh language skills, obviously to differing degrees. For the entrants that are coming into childcare training now, there are going to be very few of them, realistically, with no Welsh at all, so what's actually being incorporated into the early years care training to make sure, at that stage, that the Welsh language skills are being developed, as opposed to an add-on later on? Nicola Edwards: You're quite right. Most people coming through the education system will have some awareness of Welsh although I think it's probably important to remember we do also employ people from outside of wales. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, but the majority, being realistic. Nicola Edwards: But they don't necessarily have Welsh that is appropriate. They've got Welsh that they've developed in school. It's not necessarily appropriate for then teaching that language to children, who may be coming from families who don't use Welsh at home. So, that might be the first interaction that child has with the language. So, there's a lot of that in terms of child development and how you develop children bilingually, particularly if they're coming from English-medium homes, and reinforcing the language in language choices. There will also be some people who are, perhaps--we see this quite a lot in the office--quite confident in terms of speaking Welsh but less so in terms of some of the paperwork, the reporting, the writing and the interacting with parents more officially, which we need to think about as well. But it is mainly about getting people to a point where they can transmit that language onwards in a confident and meaningful way. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it's ingrained in the early years training. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. That's fine. Thank you for that. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Just before we move on, you said that 29 per cent of the take-up of the childcare offer is either through Welsh or is bilingual. Have you got any figures about how many children are accessing it in Welsh only? Nicola Edwards: We will have. It becomes--. With the way we do it, it's because of the way that the setting defines their language category, and that's how we collect it. We do go down to individual child level, although it's anonymised, data collection on a termly basis. So I'll have a look and see if we can send you through the last term. Lynne Neagle AM: Maybe if the committee could have a note, that would be really useful. Nicola Edwards: Yes, that's fine. Lynne Neagle AM: We've got some questions now on childcare from Dawn Bowden. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. Deputy Minister, the evaluation of the childcare offer, when it was published last year, said that there was very little evidence currently available to determine what its impact was. You're going to be producing a second evaluation in November this year; do you expect to see some indications now of the impact? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the evaluation of the first year of the childcare offer was very limited, because the childcare offer wasn't available throughout the whole of Wales. And it was a very early implementation phase. So, obviously it takes time to grow. And the evaluation for year 2, I think, will also show a limited impact for the same reasons. The offer became available across the whole of Wales only last April. So we've only got since last April that it's actually been fully available. And the parental survey was released to parents in June 2019, therefore any impact on parents in the authorities coming on board in the second year will also be negligible. So, it's from the next one, however, we hope that we will get more information. Dawn Bowden AM: So you think, by the time we get to November 2020, you might have a better picture. Julie Morgan AM: The evaluation will be more meaningful, we think, then, yes. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. I take that point. What the first year's evaluation did show, however, was that 94 per cent of respondents said that they were already using formal childcare before the offer came into place. A couple of things, really: are you surprised at that, and is that likely to inform the way that you develop the offer in the future? Julie Morgan AM: No, I'm not surprised at all. When it started off, it was only available in seven local authorities. In terms of how the families found out that it was available, they found it out through the childcare providers, where they already had their children there. So it was absolutely what we would have expected, and that will continue. But, of course, we were not able to fully advertise the childcare offer until it was available in all the local authorities, which was last April. So we are planning, this autumn, quite a big push now to try to make it available to everybody--so everybody knows about it. So, no, this is the pattern we would have expected, and I think anybody who's involved in starting up something in childcare will know you have to wait a number of years before you actually see it being fully taken up. Dawn Bowden AM: I guess the question that it raises in my mind is: does this mean that, actually, it hasn't been an incentive to get somebody back into work, because they were already in work and already had childcare provision? What you've done is you've directed money to people who were already spending that money anyway. So it hasn't been a move towards getting people into work because they couldn't afford childcare. Julie Morgan AM: Well I think that that is something that we are moving towards, because the take-up of the offer is actually increasing each month, which is why I call it a great success. At the end of July, we hit almost 16,000 children accessing the offer, which obviously means that there are 16,000 families benefiting from this, and the feedback that we have had from parents is that they have been able to--. They've got more money available, which is obvious, which is great, because obviously more money is available to plunge into the economy and carry out that sort of thing, and we've got examples of parents who've been supported into work through programmes like Parents, Childcare and Employment to begin with, and then have gone on to access the offer. So, that's again a progression. So, I think we are seeing signs that people are moving on, have got more ability to be flexible in the work that they're doing, but I hope that when we look at it again, we will be able to see people actually moving into work because of having the access to childcare. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Before-- Lynne Neagle AM: Are you going to move on? Sian's got a supplementary. Sian Gwenllian AM: Just a question on funding for the childcare offer. If you foresee that there's going to be more people going to be taking up that offer through the fact that you're marketing it more, what if the same situation arises that has happened on Anglesey? The take-up has been very good there, but the money that the Welsh Government has been allocating to Anglesey doesn't match that. What if it happens in every local authority right across Wales? Are you confident there's going to be plenty of money available to respond to that demand? Julie Morgan AM: Based on the current levels of take-up and looking at the rates of increase each month, we expect to spend in the region of PS50 million to PS55 million in this financial year. Our published plans already include the provision of PS40 million, and we're absolutely committed to making available the total funding that is needed to deliver on the offer. It is fantastic to see the offer being so well received on Ynys Mon, recognising, as Janet said earlier, it is demand led. We are managing it within the normal budgetary process. Local authorities will get the full funding that is needed. It's this year now that the big increase has happened; the previous two years-- Sian Gwenllian AM: So, local authorities won't have to find the extra money out of their own pots. Julie Morgan AM: No, absolutely not. This is funded by the Welsh Government. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. You can assure them. Lynne Neagle AM: Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Thank you, Chair. You've already alluded to this in answer to Janet earlier on, about extending the childcare offer to those in training and education. You also talk about'on the cusp'of returning to work. So, I'm not quite sure what'on the cusp'of returning to work is, but from the committee's point of view, we're very pleased that you've reached that conclusion, because it was one of the recommendations that we had following the scrutiny of the Bill. So, can you say a little more about that, bearing in mind that I'm also conscious that you've told Hefin you're going to be making an announcement shortly? So you may not be able to say too much. But a little bit more about the inclusion of parents in training and education, what'on the cusp of returning to work'is--what that means from your perspective--and how you've arrived at that decision now, six months into the programme. What is it that's made you move towards that conclusion? Julie Morgan AM: Well, obviously, the children and young persons committee made a very good case for education and training, in particular; I think that was one of the things that was at the top of the list. What we've committed to do is to review the programme, particularly looking at how we could bring in education and training, and that review will report early next year. So, early next year, we will have a view on how we could go forward. But the other thing that's also happened is that, obviously, with the new First Minister, that was one of his manifesto commitments--that he would bring education and training in. So, we're obviously following the-- Dawn Bowden AM: Because that was one of the key drivers for that as well. Julie Morgan AM: Yes, so that is another of the key drivers, as you said--the committee and what the First Minister said. There are a wealth of programmes supporting parents into education, training or work, and many of those do provide support with childcare costs. But we have, by rolling out this programme, the childcare programme, highlighted some gaps where people have felt that they, particularly people who are in full-time education--and I can think of a number of people who are actually doing PhD studies--who are--the letters may have come in from some of your constituents--not able to access the offer as things stand. So, we are looking at people who are in full-time education and training. We're using the definition by the Office for National Statistics, aren't we, in terms of education and training. And on'on the cusp of work', maybe that will have to be something we have to look at differently--those people who are actually maybe undertaking very short training programmes, preparation for work, maybe actually having interviews, where they need help with childcare, that they're sort of almost there. So, they may have to be dealt with in a different way, but I think we do want to look at those. This is expanding the offer; it's not making it universal, but it's moving on. Dawn Bowden AM: So, what are the--? Overall, then, what are the factors that you're having to take into account? Is it going to be what is needed in order to encourage people back into work? Is it going to be cost? Is it going to be a combination of all of those things? What are going to be the key factors that you're going to be looking at? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the position now is that anybody who fulfills the criteria in terms of the number of hours they work, we would look at that in terms of education and training, and then, this expression'on the cusp of work'we may have to look at differently, because they may not fulfil those numbers in terms of number of hours training. So, we'll get a criteria, and then they will have access to the childcare offer. But I just have to emphasise that there are ways of getting help with childcare already, and we wanted to make sure we don't duplicate. That's why this field is so complex, shall we say, because there's so many different ways that you can actually get help, and we want to be sure that we don't duplicate-- Dawn Bowden AM: Sorry, Julie. So, all of this is going to be incorporated in this announcement that you're going to be making shortly-- Julie Morgan AM: No, this review will report early next year. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. My final question-- Lynne Neagle AM: Before you move on, sorry, I've got a couple of supplementaries. I've got Suzy, then Sian. Sorry, Dawn. Suzy Davies AM: Just on the cost element, because if you do roll out this programme, obviously, on the back of evidence through a review, it is going to cost extra money. Early years is one of the eight priority areas for Government. There are fairly generous Barnett consequentials coming from the comprehensive spending review and announcements on schools from the UK Government, and while I accept that you've only got annual commitments there, they're still substantial. How much money have you managed to secure for early years from the most recent announcement, and when have you planned to actually use that, maybe for some of this work? Julie Morgan AM: Have you got some information on that? Nicola Edwards: The budget process is ongoing internally, so I think'secured'is probably a slightly premature phrase. Suzy Davies AM: Am I allowed to ask instead how much you've asked for, then? All I'm after is some reassurance that you will be getting some of this money, and as it is one of the eight priorities, certainly we would expect to see you getting a substantial amount of money for early years. Julie Morgan AM: As one of the Government's priorities, we would expect to get any money that came as a result of any Barnett consequentials. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. And it will be in the draft budget that we know for sure if it is successful. Julie Morgan AM: It's all in the process-- Lynne Neagle AM: And the committee will want to look very carefully at that, obviously. Julie Morgan AM: It's in the process at the moment. Suzy Davies AM: There we are. Just giving you a good warning. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: How much would it cost to move to a child-centred approach, which means that every child would be able to access the childcare offer, rather than doing it from parents? Julie Morgan AM: We are looking at that. We're having a longer-term review, in terms of what it would mean if every child had access to the childcare offer. We don't have those figures yet. We've got the one review looking at bringing in education and training. That should report early next year, and then we've got another longer-term review, looking at what a universal offer would mean. Sian Gwenllian AM: Do we know how many children we're talking about? Nicola Edwards: Yes. So, there are approximately, at any given time, around 73,000 three and four-year-olds in Wales. There's some slight rounding in the numbers there, but approximately 73,000 at any given time. Based on the current eligibility criteria for the offer, it's about 34,000 children, we believe, are eligible. This does, of course, vary, depending on a whole range of different factors, and we certainly know from what we're seeing from the offer that, even where people are entitled to something, they don't necessarily take it up. And even if they do take it up, they don't necessarily take up their full entitlement, which is also something that we'd have to think about in terms of any modelling on costings. Sian Gwenllian AM: So, half the children are in non-working families. Nicola Edwards: It's because of the requirement that, in a two-parent household, both parents must be in work. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. Two parent. Okay. Lynne Neagle AM: One of the points that the committee made very strongly in our report on the Bill was that we wanted to see a much more child-centred focus, and one of the issues that came out in scrutiny was whether, actually, three and four-year-olds were the right age to be actually targeting if we're looking at things like child development. Have you given any consideration to the actual age group that's covered when we know that, for many children, it's the first 1,000 days that makes that fundamental difference? Julie Morgan AM: We are aware that there is a case that says that two years old is a very important time. We are looking at that as part of the overall longer review, yes. We are aware of the information and what you're saying about the younger the better. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Dawn. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, my final question, Chair, thank you, is about the parent, childcare and employment programme, which is jointly funded by the European social fund and Welsh Government. It has been quite successful, in terms of its numbers anyway, in getting economically inactive parents into work. What are the plans for this programme, if and when we leave the EU and we lose the ESF funding for that? Julie Morgan AM: Well, the programme has recently been extended, with delivery continuing until June 2022, with additional ESF funding of PS5. 6 million. That's recently happened, and obviously this programme provides intensive employment to parents who are not in education, employment or training or economically inactive and where the childcare is the main barrier, and it has been a very, very successful programme. So, the UK has guaranteed funding for all EU projects approved by December 2020, and this includes the PaCE programme. I think there was also another--. I only heard it verbally. I heard some other guarantees on the radio recently from the UK Treasury about guaranteeing some of these funds. I don't know whether anybody else heard that. But the Welsh Government can only draw on the UK Government guarantee for claims that aren't paid by the European Commission, and so the current arrangements are staying in place. Dawn Bowden AM: Until when, sorry? Julie Morgan AM: Well, June 2022. Dawn Bowden AM: Oh, I see. Yes. So, that's when all the current commitments expire, basically. Yes. So, we don't know--. To do that it would have to be part of Government planning in terms of-- Julie Morgan AM: Well, we don't know what's happening with that-- Dawn Bowden AM: --what would happen beyond that. Julie Morgan AM: --funding, but there have been some promises from the UK Government recently, but nothing definite. Dawn Bowden AM: Yes, we're not holding our breath. Julie Morgan AM: No. Dawn Bowden AM: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Sian's got some specific questions now around the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019. Sian Gwenllian AM: As we know, of course, the work with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs has ended, and I know you weren't the Minister who initiated this process, but what exactly has gone wrong? What are these issues that have come to light that have made you suspend that? It's very frustrating for us, as a committee, who scrutinised that extensively and raised a lot of concerns about that. And a lot of time has been spent talking about this funding Bill, and money--PS1 million, I understand--has been wasted, if you like, unnecessarily. So, what exactly has gone wrong? Why aren't you discussing these things with HMRC? Julie Morgan AM: Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. So, thank you for that explanation. Julie Morgan AM: I've got more to say as well. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but for your transparency around your particular view that it needs to be more flexible and expanded upon and, therefore, going down the HMRC route was-- Julie Morgan AM: It would have restricted us a lot. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes. We knew that from the beginning. I mean, that's, you know--. So, it was a principle decision rather than any sort of technical matters to do with the Welsh language standards. That's been cited as one kind of--. But I'm really understanding more now that, really, what it's about is that you want to have a more flexible, and expand on the offer and that this would curtail--going through HMRC would put limits on that. Julie Morgan AM: That is one of the reasons, but there were issues about the Welsh language, which we can go into in detail, if you'd like. There were some issues about that. They would be able to process things bilingually, and I think that was probably told to the committee when we looked at the HMRC. But, in terms of the Welsh language standards that the Minister has to use, there would be some difficulties in them doing it. Sian Gwenllian AM: But would you say that your main change came about because you wanted to be more flexible rather than any difficulties-- Julie Morgan AM: One of the major reasons, I think-- Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Good. Julie Morgan AM: But there are--. As I say, there are other reasons. Those technical reasons probably do end up being quite important-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But the committee was told by the previous Minister that HMRC wouldn't have any problem at all with delivering according to the Welsh language standards. Julie Morgan AM: Do you want to add something to this? Nicola Edwards: So, in terms of some of the technical issues we had, if you want to start with the bilingual provision and the Welsh language standards, HMRC do provide a bilingual service at the moment for their customers in line with their Welsh language scheme, and I think we can all appreciate that schemes are quite different from the requirements of the standards. And there were some issues when we got into the detail of the standards that the Welsh Ministers are required to deliver to that caused some concerns in terms of how HMRC were going to do it, particularly in terms of the multiple IT systems that go into building up the childcare services. So, for example, there are a number of what are called'special characters'in the Welsh alphabet, such as the to bach, for example. The HMRC IT system has some issues with that. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, well, with due respect, the to bach has always been there-- Nicola Edwards: Oh, yes, I completely agree. Unfortunately, however-- Sian Gwenllian AM: --and HMRC would have been able to tell you, really early on, you would have thought, that it was--. I don't really want to go into it, because I think we've got to the crux of why HMRC was dropped. I think it's been dropped because Julie feels that the offer needs to be more flexible, and I can understand why you would say that. Julie Morgan AM: If we bring in training and education, for example, we wouldn't be able to do that via the HMRC, it would have to be done by the local authorities. Foster parents have to be done via the local authorities. Any people of immigration status of no resource from public funds, that would have to be done via the local authorities. And with the local authorities also wanting to do it--. I mean, there are other things with using HMRC--if any changes were made with the English offer, for example, because this would be delivered via HMRC with the English offer, that would cause difficulties for the Welsh offer. So, we wanted something more flexible. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add on that. Jo-Anne Daniels: The only thing I'd add is that--and, again, I think the Minister has referred to this--the costs that HMRC presented us with at the end of the discovery phase were significantly higher than the costs that had initially been outlined and that we outlined to the committee in the regulatory impact assessment. So, our conclusion is that we can deliver a cheaper system and a system that has the flexibility that the Deputy Minister has referred to by working with local authorities rather than HMRC. So, there is an important issue around value for money as well and making sure that the investment that we're making into developing the national system is one that--that, in a sense, that investment stays in Wales. So, obviously, the money that we're paying over to HMRC to run the system would be supporting HMRC and their employees wherever they may be based, many of them not based in Wales; investment in local authorities to administer the system means that we're retaining more of that investment here. Sian Gwenllian AM: Well, I congratulate you on persuading local government and WLGA to change their minds, because they actually told this committee that they favoured the HMRC option--and this is only going back a few months--because it will remove--and this is quoting them--'it will remove the administrative burden of receiving applications and checking eligibility from local authorities'-- blah, blah, blah, blah. So, they've obviously changed their minds as well, which is, you know--. I congratulate you on that, but it does present us as a committee with a little bit of a problem, really, because, if we're told one thing a few months ago and then we're told something completely different today, you know, evidence--we have to go on evidence that we've heard, and the evidence has changed now. Julie Morgan AM: I think, during the period since it was discussed on the committee, the work with the HMRC has helped highlight to us where we needed to go. So, I think we did learn a lot and it certainly has helped show to us where we think is the best place to go. I would like to pay tribute to the local authorities, because they've been great partners in this and they're very positive about moving forward keeping the work. And there's also a feeling that, because they are so much closer to the local public than HMRC is, they're able to build up links with families and help with some of these difficult issues. Because I'm sure many of you may have had individual cases--I certainly have--where there's been quite a lot of complexity about helping people fill in the forms and look at their eligibility. So, I say well done to the local authorities. And thanks to the HMRC, because we've had nothing but a very positive relationship with them. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Ms Daniels, you referred to value for money. How much is it actually going to cost to change this system from being a temporary arrangement with local authorities to a permanent one? And how much more is it going to cost for the more flexible system that you have in mind? They're not going to do this for nothing. How much extra are you giving them, and will they use it for this? How are you ensuring it's used for this? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, at the moment, local--. So, two things. Just to start by saying the eligibility checking process is not undertaken by all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: No, no, I realise that. Yes, I got all that. Jo-Anne Daniels: So, part of the reason for using 10 is to try to ensure that we build economies of scale and that we have a more efficient operation. Those authorities that undertake that function are given a specific grant in order to do that. That grant is ring-fenced to that purpose. Suzy Davies AM: Could you give us an idea of the price tag? Jo-Anne Daniels: At the moment, it's about PS2. 5 million. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, just as a round figure--that's fine. Nicola Edwards: Just for the administration. They get separate funding for the childcare, obviously. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Jo-Anne Daniels: So that, as I said, is a ring-fenced sum that they use to administer the offer. We are now starting the detailed work to define the new system requirements so that we will have a single application process across Wales, moving forward. As part of that work, we'll need to consider the detailed costings, but our initial estimate suggests that it would be less than the cost proposed by HMRC. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, when those costings are worked up, perhaps we could have a note comparing the two figures. Jo-Anne Daniels: Yes, we would be very happy to share more detail on that. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: If it became a universal offer, would those costs reduce? Would there be so much bureaucracy involved in checking eligibility and stuff if every child was open to the offer? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, clearly, if every child is eligible, then a large part of the process falls away in terms of the need to verify income and so on. That doesn't mean that there's no administration. For example, with the foundation phase, which is universally available, there is an application process and there is an administrative function that sits alongside that. At this point in time, I couldn't give you any indication of-- Sian Gwenllian AM: But it would be substantially less, wouldn't it, because they wouldn't have to do all these eligibility checks and all those things? Nicola Edwards: They wouldn't have to do the eligibility checks, but they would still have to make payments to the childcare providers and make sure they were paying for the right number of hours in respect of each child. So, parents would still need to tell them where their child was going, and there would still need to be some work alongside that. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Sian, do you want to ask about the Welsh language? Sian Gwenllian AM: I think we've--. I'm happy with that. Lynne Neagle AM: Really--? Sian Gwenllian AM: I don't think that that was the real reason why the change happened. Julie Morgan AM: One of the reasons. Lynne Neagle AM: Nevertheless, the committee was given very concrete assurances that the Welsh language side of this was going to be covered off. Have you got anything that you want to add on that? Obviously, for us as a committee, we believe what we're told when we are given assurances. So, that's quite concerning for us, really, that that suddenly then became an issue, when both HMRC and the Minister at the time told us that this wasn't going to be a problem. Nicola Edwards: So, I think it's the point that I was talking about earlier. There's a difference between a bilingual service in the context of what HMRC understood that to be, in the context of their scheme, and the very detail of the standards when they got into their IT systems. Lynne Neagle AM: Shouldn't that have been something that was worked out at the beginning? Nicola Edwards: Possibly, but they did need to do quite detailed work, not just into their own IT systems, but the feed-in systems from the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Post Office as well, to understand the full complexity of how the standards would comply across all of that. They do provide a bilingual service. It was just some of the specific details of the requirements placed on the Welsh Ministers, because it is the Welsh Ministers'standards that they would need to deliver against that they were struggling with. Lynne Neagle AM: Right, okay. Sian Gwenllian AM: Yes, but those standards were there right from the very beginning. Lynne Neagle AM: I think that the committee would feel that that should have been bottomed out at the beginning, really. Sian Gwenllian AM: Nothing has changed in terms of the standards. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, just before we move on to Flying Start, can I just ask: the Minister mentioned a longer term review of the childcare offer. Are you able to give us any indication of when that will report, please? Julie Morgan AM: Would we have any idea? Nicola Edwards: We haven't set out a definitive timescale on that as of yet because we've been focusing very much on getting the review in terms of training, education and on the cusp of returning to work up and running. But sometime next year. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. So, it will report sometime next year. Nicola Edwards: Yes. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We'll move on now to Flying Start and questions from Suzy Davies. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. Can I just begin by asking you how you respond to the assertion that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds do better in a mixed socioeconomic environment than in a targeted environment? Julie Morgan AM: I think that's what Flying Start does, isn't it? Yes, I would have thought that was likely. Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reason I'm asking you that, of course, is because this committee has suggested, perhaps, changes to the outreach system to target more disadvantaged children, and not necessarily capture people who happen to be in a geographic area. Julie Morgan AM: So, you're saying that you feel that a universal offer in certain areas is not advantageous to-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, I'm asking you, really. If it's the case that we're only going after disadvantaged children, which would take very precise targeting-- Julie Morgan AM: I'm not only going after disadvantaged children. I feel that we should be offering something for all children, and our considerations are for all children. The reason we've targeted Flying Start is because it would be great if we had enough money to have Flying Start throughout the whole of Wales, but we just don't have that sort of money. Because I think Flying Start has proved to be a great--very successful. Suzy Davies AM: I'm going to ask you a few more questions on that. Because just in response to this committee's 2018 report, you did say that:'defined geographical targeting of Flying Start support will be considered as part of the Welsh Government's work on the Early Years system.'That suggests you still have geographic targeting in mind. So, if you're looking at a very mixed source of economic experience for children, what are the geographic boundaries you're considering? Julie Morgan AM: At the moment, Flying Start can go beyond the geographical boundaries, with the extension-- Suzy Davies AM: With limits, yes. Julie Morgan AM: Yes. I think they can use 10 per cent of their income to go beyond the geographical boundaries, and many of them have done that. But, obviously, there are four elements to Flying Start, and only those geographical areas have got the four elements, but there could be the opportunity of extending some of that beyond the Flying Start geographical areas. We're looking at this. Suzy Davies AM: I accept what you say about the current system-- Julie Morgan AM: I believe it's much more--. I believe very strongly in having a universal system, where everybody is able to access it. Suzy Davies AM: I appreciate that as well. But, obviously, there are huge cost implications for that--unless you're giving us some insight into what you're going to say next week, I don't know. But actually, defining anything geographically, which now seems to be fairly arbitrary, because it's not targeted purely at disadvantaged children--on what basis are we choosing the geographic areas we are choosing at the moment? Julie Morgan AM: Well, they're chosen then because of the benefit take-up in those particular areas. So, it's reaching some of the poorest children, but not all of the poorest children, but it's reaching the poorest children in a way that is not stigmatising, and where the services are open to everybody, and I think that's very important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, having established that, we have fairly recent research here that a third of children living in poverty in Wales are already falling behind at the age of five--that suggests that two thirds of them aren't, but it's still a very worrying statistic. Not all children live in Flying Start areas; how are you going to reach that third who, even at such an early age, are already falling behind? How many of them are in Flying Start areas? Julie Morgan AM: I think the actual number of children in poverty, the most disadvantaged that we reach through the Flying Start areas--I think it's about 46 per cent. Is that--? Do you know the actual percentage? Suzy Davies AM: It's about a quarter of total children are in there, but-- Jo-Anne Daniels: So, just to give you a few of the numbers, there are just over 36,000 children benefiting from Flying Start services. That equates to about 23 per cent of children, overall, in Wales. And because of the nature of the benefit take-up data, and because we don't assess eligibility within a Flying Start area, we can't be absolutely certain how many children within a Flying Start area are actually in poverty. So, it's an estimate, and it's a range, and the range is that around 45 per cent of children in Flying Start areas would be in poverty. FootnoteLink Suzy Davies AM: Well, that's interesting. I would have expected it to be much higher than that, particularly if the geographic areas had been targeted on benefit claims, effectively. Are you disappointed that the proportion is--basically, 55 per cent of those children aren't living in poverty. That's what you're saying, isn't it? Jo-Anne Daniels: Well, I'd offer two observations. One: the nature of poverty in Wales is actually, generally, more dispersed than perhaps sometimes is appreciated. Yes, we have very concentrated areas of-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, actually, we do appreciate it, which is why we're asking this question. [Laughter. ] Jo-Anne Daniels: Okay. So that's one issue to think about. Sorry, I've lost my train of thought now, in terms of the second--oh, sorry: whether you're in or out of poverty is, in one sense, very black/white. But in reality of course--in terms of the income definition, it's very black/white. But, of course, there will be a large number of people who are just above, but also families who move in and out, so it's quite a transient population in some senses, in terms of people having incomes that aren't stable, people having jobs that go with that that aren't stable. So, at any one point in time, you're only sort of capturing a snapshot of what's happening. In reality, it's a bit more complex than that. Suzy Davies AM: I accept that. I mentioned a third of children living in poverty had fallen behind at five; by the age of 14, half that number is still falling behind, so something has happened between that third and that half to improve the life chances of those individual children or young people. Is that attributable to Flying Start? Can you say that candidly? Or is it a happy coincidence, where there could be some causation, but we can't prove it? Jo-Anne Daniels: We certainly think that Flying Start is making a positive impact, both on the point at which children go to school, and then subsequently. And I think as the committee knows, we've been working with the SAIL--secure anonymised information linkage--and the databank there to look at how we can do longitudinal studies to track children's progress, to look at the extent to which outcomes are effected by Flying Start interventions. Suzy Davies AM: We probably don't have time for this level of detail today, but half of those children are still behind at the age of 14. So, I'd be curious to know if there's any immediate plans to help them catch up or make sure that their successors don't fall into the same position, the same trap. Have you got anything high level that you can mention at this stage? Julie Morgan AM: Just in terms of what we're thinking of doing with Flying Start--. The key thing about Flying Start is the collaborative way that it works with the health visitors and all the speech and language therapists and childcare, and we're looking at ways of trying to get some of those elements to reach a wider group. And as I said, we talked about earlier the eight earlier years transformation pathfinders that we talked about in the local authorities--we talked about that earlier--so, that's where we're going to look at Flying Start and how we can try to make it more accessible to more children. So, we do want to extend the benefits of Flying Start. We do want to make it available to more children, and that's what we're looking at. And we're looking at that in those eight pathfinder areas. And you'll have to wait to see what we come up with-- Suzy Davies AM: No, no--we'll ask you more about that in due course. Actually, that job would be an awful lot easier if you knew how many children within Flying Start areas were taking up all four elements. Why don't you know that? Why is that data not collected? Julie Morgan AM: Do we know why? Jo-Anne Daniels: So, the approach that we've taken to evaluation in Flying Start--. The committee will have seen the various evaluation reports that have been published, and I know that you're familiar with the work that, as I say, we've been doing with SAIL. We're currently focusing on individual data collection, and through that we want to be able to report on levels of engagement, but also outcomes for children. We've been piloting that new approach in six local authorities. We hope to be able to extend that, and we hope to be able to provide more evidence about the interventions and the impact that they then achieve. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. All right. Because, to be honest, I would want to know if a child's chances have improved primarily because they're getting good-quality childcare or primarily because their parents are taking up parenting courses. There's got to be some indication somewhere in here about which of these four elements is making the greatest difference. Jo-Anne Daniels: I would just caution in terms of expectations. It will always be quite difficult to definitively provide answers to that, because many parents will be taking these things up in combination. So, disentangling which has had the effect is, obviously, quite tricky--in particular, all parents will be getting the enhanced health visiting. Not every parent will take up parenting support, not every child will need speech and language help, so-- Suzy Davies AM: And that's why we need to know who is. Jo-Anne Daniels: Disentangling what's helped and what hasn't I think will always be quite a difficult thing to do. Suzy Davies AM: But it would also be helpful to know which combinations work best as well. Just on the final point from me--yes, 88 per cent of Flying Start's childcare offers were taken up, but we've had some local authorities where the take-up has dropped dramatically. I think Denbighshire was down a fair bit, wasn't it, and Ceredigion, I think, had had a poor take-up. Have you got any indication why? I'm thinking of Denbighshire particularly, where there is a tradition--taking up third-party childcare is cultural there, whereas in Ceredigion, for example, there are far fewer places available in the first place and less of a tradition of children taking up childcare. But what's happened in Denbighshire? Julie Morgan AM: I think there are a number of different reasons why parents do decide not to use a facility, and, obviously, that always exists, but each local authority has a Flying Start account manager in place to support them in the delivery of the programme and the account management activities, and there are formal account meetings that look at this sort of thing once a year-- Suzy Davies AM: So, what have they told you? Julie Morgan AM: --and these meetings will take place in November 2019. That's when the specific delivery issues will be discussed in depth, so that's when we'll find out what has happened and why there may have been a drop. Suzy Davies AM: Can I just ask about the timing of that? Because if you already know that there's a 6 per cent drop, why will it take the best part of a year to--well, November's only next month, to be fair, now, but why will it take that length of time to establish why there's a drop? You'd have thought if you'd seen a trend like that-- Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, they meet at certain times and they will assess what's happened. That seems quite normal to me. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, but we'll get a note on that, is it? It's just that they knew this six months ago. Julie Morgan AM: In November, we'll have more information about this, so we can let you have information about that. Suzy Davies AM: That would be really helpful, just for--. I'm sure constituents in Denbighshire will want to know about that. And then finally from me, Chair, if I may, Flying Start beneficiaries--it's got a specific explanation of what a Flying Start beneficiary is, but I think, particularly in view of the evidence we've heard on this committee about parental support in connection with the removal of the defence of reasonable chastisement, for example, this committee is very concerned about what's out there in terms of parental support. Eighteen per cent of Flying Start beneficiaries have parents attending the informal parenting courses; that's 18 per cent, that's not very high. Any idea about what you might be able to do to encourage take-up or is that very locally decided? Lynne Neagle AM: If I can add to that, obviously, somebody only has to attend one course--we've got no way of knowing whether parents are completing the whole of a course, really. Julie Morgan AM: Obviously, the offer is there for parents to take up the parenting courses, and there are four elements to Flying Start, and maybe some of the parents don't feel that they want to or need to. I don't think we've got any more evidence on that for take-up-- Suzy Davies AM: Well, the reach of this is going to be important, because we need the reassurance on the back of the legislation that is going through at the moment. Julie Morgan AM: Absolutely, yes. Jo-Anne Daniels: Parenting courses are, of course, one aspect of parenting support, but not the only one, and they'll be appropriate for a lot of parents, but for some not. What all parents do get at an enhanced level in Flying Start is the support of the health visitor, so the health visitor is, in effect, providing a significant amount of support for parenting. Now, that can be practical things like weaning or potty training et cetera, but, actually, it's also about managing a child's behaviour, managing how a parent develops that bonding and that attachment with their child. So, the role of the health visitor in supporting a parent to be a parent is absolutely critical, and every parent in Flying Start areas will be getting that enhanced level of support. Of course, it's not just in Flying Start areas now, because with the Healthy Child Wales programme, the universal programme of health visiting visits, we have a much more consistent and standardised set of visits and engagements with parents that cover a lot of these areas. In addition, I'd also add that when parents use the childcare in Flying Start, or childcare generally outside of Flying Start areas, there is often a lot of working between the childcare setting and the parent over parenting--again, managing a child's behaviour, managing any issues that the childcare worker thinks are emerging in terms of whether it's eating or, again, toileting. So, parenting courses are important, but it's really essential that we see those in the broader context of the different ways in which lots of professionals interact with parents, providing them with advice, guidance and support, and actually what works for parents in terms of how they take on board some of that advice and that help. Sometimes a formal course is quite off-putting for parents, but the sort of quiet word, the top tips, the advice that a friendly professional gives can be very, very impactful. Suzy Davies AM: That's a really helpful answer. It does raise, unfortunately, another question about whether a health visitor in those circumstances might find themselves in a difficult position if they're dealing with a parent who has smacked a child, but we'll leave that for Stage 3. Julie Morgan AM: We'll be dealing with that, I'm sure. Suzy Davies AM: But thank you; that was a helpful answer. Thank you, Chair. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from Members? No. Okay. Well, can I thank the Minister and the officials for attending this morning? As usual, you'll be sent a transcript to check for accuracy following the meeting, but thank you again for your attendance. Thank you. Julie Morgan AM: Thank you very much. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Item 4 is papers to note. There's just one today: the letter from the WLGA regarding the Childcare Funding (Wales) Act 2019 in response to our letter asking about the change in approach. Item 5 then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

The meeting contains discussions of the main focus on early childhood education and care programmes. The team were working with local authorities and healthboards to see how to work together and simplify the Welsh Government's approach, looking forward to encouraging the development of the foundation phase in non-maintained settings. Addressing big differences in the amount of early childhood education in different parts of Wales, the team answered the needs of the families and the children in certain areas. Then the meeting discussed the demand-driven approach to the childcare market, asserting there was no evidence of cutting on the foundation. Then the team answered the question about the demand of Welsh language skills by obviously differing degrees and hiring workers of different backgrounds. When talking about the competition with existing formal childcare, the team believed it was expected. Then the team alleged they would do more investment and reviews on the programme, and discussed how to tackle the technical issues with HMRC. Next the extra cost was not yet defined, the price tag was announced to be PS2. 5million. Finally, the meeting discussed the necessity of adding eligibility checks to the beginning of the programme, and the details on the sample" Flying Start''programme.

tr-sq-89

tr-sq-89_0

Summarize what was said about the digits recordings Postdoc B: Alright. Professor C: So, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Um, so I wanted to discuss digits briefly, but that won't take too long. Professor C: Oh good. Right. OK, agenda items, Uh, we have digits, What else we got? PhD A: New version of the presegmentation. Professor C: New version of presegmentation. Postdoc B: Um, do we wanna say something about the, an update of the, uh, transcript? PhD G: Yeah, why don't you summarize the {disfmarker} Professor C: Update on transcripts. PhD G: And I guess that includes some {disfmarker} the filtering for the, the ASI refs, too. Postdoc B: Mmm. Professor C: Filtering for what? PhD G: For the references that we need to go from the {disfmarker} the {pause} fancy transcripts to the sort of {nonvocalsound} brain - dead. Postdoc B: It'll {disfmarker} it'll be {disfmarker} basically it'll be a re - cap of a meeting that we had jointly this morning. Professor C: Uh - huh. PhD G: With Don, as well. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Got it. Anything else more pressing than those things? So {disfmarker} So, why don't we just do those. You said yours was brief, so {disfmarker} Grad F: OK. OK well, the, w uh as you can see from the numbers on the digits we're almost done. The digits goes up to {pause} about four thousand. Um, and so, uh, we probably will be done with the TI - digits in, um, another couple weeks. um, depending on how many we read each time. So there were a bunch that we skipped. You know, someone fills out the form and then they're not at the meeting and so it's blank. Um, but those are almost all filled in as well. And so, once we're {disfmarker} it's done it would be very nice to train up a recognizer and actually start working with this data. PhD D: So we'll have a corpus that's the size of TI - digits? Grad F: And so {disfmarker} One particular test set of TI - digits. PhD D: Test set, OK. Grad F: So, I {disfmarker} I extracted, Ther - there was a file sitting around which people have used here as a test set. It had been randomized and so on PhD D: Grad F: and that's just what I used to generate the order. of these particular ones. PhD D: Oh! Great. Great. Professor C: So, I'm impressed by what we could do, Is take the standard training set for TI - digits, train up with whatever, you know, great features we think we have, uh for instance, and then test on uh this test set. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} Professor C: And presumably uh it should do reasonably well on that, and then, presumably, we should go to the distant mike, and it should do poorly. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: And then we should get really smart over the next year or two, and it {disfmarker} that should get better. Grad F: Right. And inc increase it by one or two percent, yeah. Professor C: Yeah, {vocalsound} Yeah. Grad F: Um, but, in order to do that we need to extract out the actual digits. Professor C: Right. Grad F: Um, so that {disfmarker} the reason it's not just a transcript is that there're false starts, and misreads, and miscues and things like that. And so I have a set of scripts and X Waves where you just select the portion, hit R, um, it tells you what the next one should be, and you just look for that. You know, so it {disfmarker} it'll put on the screen," The next set is six nine, nine two two" . And you find that, and, hit the key and it records it in a file in a particular format. Professor C: So is this {disfmarker} Grad F: And so the {disfmarker} the question is, should we have the transcribers do that or should we just do it? Well, some of us. I've been do I've done, eight meetings, something like that, just by hand. Just myself, rather. So it will not take long. Um {disfmarker} Professor C: Uh, what {disfmarker} what do you think? Postdoc B: My feeling is that we discussed this right before coffee and I think it's a {disfmarker} it's a fine idea partly because, um, it's not un unrelated to their present skill set, but it will add, for them, an extra dimension, it might be an interesting break for them. And also it is contributing to the, uh, c composition of the transcript cuz we can incorporate those numbers directly and it'll be a more complete transcript. So I'm {disfmarker} I think it's fine, that part. Grad F: There is {disfmarker} there is {disfmarker} Professor C: So you think it's fine to have the transcribers do it? Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah, OK. Grad F: There's one other small bit, which is just entering the information which at s which is at the top of this form, onto the computer, to go along with the {disfmarker} where the digits are recorded automatically. PhD D: Good. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And so it's just, you know, typing in name, times {disfmarker} time, date, and so on. Um, which again either they can do, but it is, you know, firing up an editor, or, again, I can do. Or someone else can do. Postdoc B: And, that, you know, I'm not, that {disfmarker} that one I'm not so sure if it's into the {disfmarker} the, things that, I, wanted to use the hours for, because the, the time that they'd be spending doing that they wouldn't be able to be putting more words on. Professor C: Mmm. Postdoc B: But that's really your choice, it's your {disfmarker} PhD D: So are these two separate tasks that can happen? Or do they have to happen at the same time before {disfmarker} Grad F: No they don't have {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} you have to enter the data before, you do the second task, but they don't have to happen at the same time. PhD D: OK. Grad F: So it's {disfmarker} it's just I have a file whi which has this information on it, and then when you start using my scripts, for extracting the times, it adds the times at the bottom of the file. And so, um, I mean, it's easy to create the files and leave them blank, and so actually we could do it in either order. PhD D: Oh, OK. Grad F: Um, it's {disfmarker} it's sort of nice to have the same person do it just as a double - check, to make sure you're entering for the right person. But, either way. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah just by way of uh, uh, a uh, order of magnitude, uh, um, we've been working with this Aurora, uh data set. And, uh, the best score, on the, nicest part of the data, that is, where you've got training and test set that are basically the same kinds of noise and so forth, uh, is about, uh {disfmarker} I think the best score was something like five percent, uh, error, per digit. PhD A: Per digit. Professor C: So, that {disfmarker} Grad F: Per digit. Professor C: You're right. So if you were doing {pause} ten digit, uh, recognition, {vocalsound} you would really be in trouble. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} The point there, and this is uh car noise uh, uh things, but {disfmarker} but real {disfmarker} real situation, PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: well," real" , Um, the {disfmarker} uh there's one microphone that's close, that they have as {disfmarker} as this sort of thing, close versus distant. Uh but in a car, instead of {disfmarker} instead of having a projector noise it's {disfmarker} it's car noise. Uh but it wasn't artificially added to get some {disfmarker} some artificial signal - to - noise ratio. It was just people driving around in a car. So, that's {disfmarker} that's an indication, uh that was with, many sites competing, and this was the very best score and so forth, so. More typical numbers like PhD D: Although the models weren't, that good, right? I mean, the models are pretty crappy? Professor C: You're right. I think that we could have done better on the models, but the thing is that we got {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} this is the kind of typical number, for all of the, uh, uh, things in this task, all of the, um, languages. And so I {disfmarker} I think we'd probably {disfmarker} the models would be better in some than in others. Um, so, uh. Anyway, just an indication once you get into this kind of realm even if you're looking at connected digits it can be pretty hard. PhD D: Hmm. Postdoc B: Hmm. It's gonna be fun to see how we, compare at this. Very exciting. s @ @. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: How did we do on the TI - digits? Grad F: Well the prosodics are so much different s it's gonna be, strange. I mean the prosodics are not the same as TI - digits, for example. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure how much of effect that will have. PhD D: H how do {disfmarker} PhD G: What do you mean, the prosodics? Grad F: Um, just what we were talking about with grouping. That with these, the grouping, there's no grouping at all, and so it's just {disfmarker} the only sort of discontinuity you have is at the beginning and the end. PhD G: So what are they doing in Aurora, are they reading actual phone numbers, Grad F: Aurora I don't know. I don't know what they do in Aurora. PhD G: or, a {disfmarker} a digit at a time, or {disfmarker}? Professor C: Uh, I'm not sure how {disfmarker} PhD G: Cuz it's {disfmarker} Professor C: no, no I mean it's connected {disfmarker} it's connected, uh, digits, PhD G: Connected. Professor C: yeah. But. Grad F: But {disfmarker} Right. PhD G: So there's also the {disfmarker} not just the prosody but the cross {disfmarker} the cross - word modeling is probably quite different. PhD D: H How Grad F: But in TI - digits, they're reading things like zip codes and phone numbers and things like that, PhD G: Right. PhD D: do we do on TI - digits? Grad F: so it's gonna be different. I don't remember. I mean, very good, right? Professor C: Yeah, I mean we were in the. Grad F: One and a half percent, two percent, something like that? Professor C: Uh, I th no I think we got under a percent, but it was {disfmarker} but it's {disfmarker} but I mean. The very best system that I saw in the literature was a point two five percent or something that somebody had at {disfmarker} at Bell Labs, or. Uh, but. But, uh, sort of pulling out all the stops. Grad F: Oh really? Postdoc B: s @ @. It s strikes me that there are more {disfmarker} each of them is more informative because it's so, random, Grad F: OK. Alright. PhD D: Hmm. Professor C: But I think a lot of systems sort of get half a percent, or three - quarters a percent, Grad F: Right. Professor C: and we're {disfmarker} we're in there somewhere. Grad F: But that {disfmarker} I mean it's really {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's close - talking mikes, no noise, clean signal, just digits, I mean, every everything is good. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: It's the beginning of time in speech recognition. Grad F: Yes, exactly. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And we've only recently got it to anywhere near human. PhD G: It's like the, single cell, you know, it's the beginning of life, PhD D: Pre - prehistory. PhD G: yeah. Grad F: And it's still like an order of magnitude worse than what humans do. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So. Professor C: When {disfmarker} When they're wide awake, yeah. Um, Grad F: Yeah. After coffee. Professor C: after coffee, you're right. Not after lunch. Grad F: OK, so, um, what I'll do then is I'll go ahead and enter, this data. And then, hand off to Jane, and the transcribers to do the actual extraction of the digits. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. One question I have that {disfmarker} that I mean, we wouldn't know the answer to now but might, do some guessing, but I was talking before about doing some model modeling of arti uh, uh, marking of articulatory, features, with overlap and so on. Grad F: Hmm. Professor C: And, and, um, On some subset. One thought might be to do this uh, on {disfmarker} on the digits, or some piece of the digits. Uh, it'd be easier, uh, and so forth. The only thing is I'm a little concerned that maybe the kind of phenomena, in w i i The reason for doing it is because the {disfmarker} the argument is that certainly with conversational speech, the stuff that we've looked at here before, um, just doing the simple mapping, from, um, the phone, to the corresponding features that you could look up in a book, uh, isn't right. It isn't actually right. In fact there's these overlapping processes where some voicing some up and then some, you know, some nasality is {disfmarker} comes in here, and so forth. And you do this gross thing saying" Well I guess it's this phone starting there" . So, uh, that's the reasoning. But, It could be that when we're reading digits, because it's {disfmarker} it's for such a limited set, that maybe {disfmarker} maybe that phenomenon doesn't occur as much. I don't know. Di - an anybody {disfmarker}? {pause} Do you have any {disfmarker}? {pause} Anybody have any opinion about that, Postdoc B: and that people might articulate more, and you that might end up with more {disfmarker} a closer correspondence. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad F: Yeah {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I agree. PhD D: Sort of less predictability, Grad F: That {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: and {disfmarker} You hafta {disfmarker} Grad F: It's a {disfmarker} Well {disfmarker} Would, this corpus really be the right one to even try that on? PhD G: Well it's definitely true that, when people are, reading, even if they're re - reading what, they had said spontaneously, that they have very different patterns. Mitch showed that, and some, dissertations have shown that. Professor C: Right. PhD G: So the fact that they're reading, first of all, whether they're reading in a room of, people, or rea you know, just the fact that they're reading will make a difference. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: And, depends what you're interested in. Professor C: See, I don't know. So, may maybe the thing will be do {disfmarker} to take some very small subset, I mean not have a big, program, but take a small set, uh, subset of the conversational speech and a small subset of the digits, and {pause} look and {disfmarker} and just get a feeling for it. Um, just take a look. Really. Postdoc B: H That could {disfmarker} could be an interesting design, too, cuz then you'd have the com the comparison of the, uh, predictable speech versus the less predictable speech Professor C: Cuz I don't think anybody is, I at least, I don't know, of anybody, uh, well, I don't know, {vocalsound} the answers. PhD D: Hey. Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: and maybe you'd find that it worked in, in the, case of the pr of the, uh, non - predictable. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: Hafta think about, the particular acoustic features to mark, too, because, I mean, some things, they wouldn't be able to mark, like, uh, you know, uh, tense lax. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Some things are really difficult. You know, Postdoc B: Well. PhD D: just listening. Grad F: M I think we can get Ohala in to, give us some advice on that. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: Also I thought you were thinking of a much more restricted set of features, that {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah, but I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was, like he said, {vocalsound} I was gonna bring John in and ask John what he thought. Postdoc B: Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. Professor C: Right. But I mean you want {disfmarker} you want it be restrictive but you also want it to {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} to have coverage. Grad F: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah Professor C: You know i you should. It should be such that if you, if you, uh, if you had o um, all of the features, determined that you {disfmarker} that you were uh ch have chosen, that that would tell you, uh, in the steady - state case, uh, the phone. So, um. Postdoc B: OK. Grad F: Even, I guess with vowels that would be pretty hard, wouldn't it? To identify actually, you know, which one it is? Postdoc B: It would seem to me that the points of articulation would be m more, g uh, I mean that's {disfmarker} I think about articulatory features, I think about, points of articulation, which means, uh, rather than vowels. Grad F: Yeah. PhD D: Points of articulation? What do you mean? Postdoc B: So, is it, uh, bilabial or dental or is it, you know, palatal. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: Which {disfmarker} which are all like where {disfmarker} where your tongue comes to rest. Professor C: Place, place. PhD D: Place of ar place of articulation. Grad F: Uvular. PhD A: Place. Postdoc B: Place. Thank you, what {disfmarker} whatev whatever I s said, that's {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK. Postdoc B: I really meant place. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK, I see. Professor C: Yeah. OK we got our jargon then, OK. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh. PhD G: Well it's also, there's, really a difference between, the pronunciation models in the dictionary, and, the pronunciations that people produce. And, so, You get, some of that information from Steve's work on the {disfmarker} on the labeling Professor C: Right. Grad F: Right. PhD G: and it really, I actually think that data should be used more. That maybe, although I think the meeting context is great, that he has transcriptions that give you the actual phone sequence. And you can go from {disfmarker} not from that to the articulatory features, but that would be a better starting point for marking, the gestural features, then, data where you don't have that, because, we {disfmarker} you wanna know, both about the way that they're producing a certain sound, and what kinds of, you know what kinds of, phonemic, differences you get between these, transcribed, sequences and the dictionary ones. Professor C: Well you might be right that mi might be the way at getting at, what I was talking about, but the particular reason why I was interested in doing that was because I remember, when that happened, and, John Ohala was over here and he was looking at the spectrograms of the more difficult ones. Uh, he didn't know what to say, about, what is the sequence of phones there. They came up with some compromise. Because that really wasn't what it look like. It didn't look like a sequence of phones Grad F: Right. PhD G: Right. Professor C: it look like this blending thing happening here and here and here. Grad F: Yeah, so you have this feature here, and, overlap, yeah. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: There was no name for that. PhD G: But {disfmarker} Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: But it still is {disfmarker} there's a {disfmarker} there are two steps. One {disfmarker} you know, one is going from a dictionary pronunciation of something, like," gonna see you tomorrow" , Grad F: And {disfmarker} Or" gonta" . Professor C: Right. Yeah. PhD G: it could be" going to" or" gonna" or" gonta s" you know. Professor C: Right. PhD G: And, yeah." Gonna see you tomorrow" , uh," guh see you tomorrow" . And, that it would be nice to have these, intermediate, or these {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} these reduced pronunciations that those transcribers had marked or to have people mark those as well. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Because, it's not, um, that easy to go from the, dictionary, word pronuncia the dictionary phone pronunciation, to the gestural one without this intermediate or a syllable level kind of, representation. Grad F: Well I don't think Morgan's suggesting that we do that, though. Professor C: Do you mean, PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Yeah, I mean, I I I'm jus at the moment of course we're just talking about what, to provide as a tool for people to do research who have different ideas about how to do it. So for instance, you might have someone who just has a wor has words with states, and has uh {disfmarker} uh, comes from articulatory gestures to that. And someone else, might actually want some phonetic uh intermediate thing. So I think it would be {disfmarker} be best to have all of it if we could. But {pause} um, Grad F: But {disfmarker} What I'm imagining is a score - like notation, where each line is a particular feature. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Right, Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: so you would say, you know, it's voiced through here, and so you have label here, and you have nas nasal here, and, they {disfmarker} they could be overlapping in all sorts of bizarre ways that don't correspond to the timing on phones. Professor C: I mean this is the kind of reason why {disfmarker} I remember when at one of the Switchboard, workshops, that uh when we talked about doing the transcription project, Dave Talkin said," can't be done" . Grad F: Right. Professor C: He was {disfmarker} he was, what {disfmarker} what he meant was that this isn't, you know, a sequence of phones, and when you actually look at Switchboard that's, not what you see, and, you know. And. It, Grad F: And in {disfmarker} in fact the inter - annotator agreement was not that good, right? On the harder ones? Professor C: yeah I mean it was PhD G: It depends how you look at it, and I {disfmarker} I understand what you're saying about this, kind of transcription exactly, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: because I've seen {disfmarker} you know, where does the voicing bar start and so forth. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: All I'm saying is that, it is useful to have that {disfmarker} the transcription of what was really said, and which syllables were reduced. Uh, if you're gonna add the features it's also useful to have some level of representation which is, is a reduced {disfmarker} it's a pronunciation variant, that currently the dictionaries don't give you Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: because if you add them to the dictionary and you run recognition, you, you add confusion. Professor C: Right. Right. PhD G: So people purposely don't add them. So it's useful to know which variant was {disfmarker} was produced, at least at the phone level. PhD D: So it would be {disfmarker} it would be great if we had, either these kind of, labelings on, the same portion of Switchboard that Steve marked, or, Steve's type markings on this data, with these. PhD G: Right. That's all, I mean. Exactly. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Exactly. Professor C: Yeah, no I {disfmarker} I don't disagree with that. PhD G: And Steve's type is fairly {disfmarker} it's not that slow, uh, uh, I dunno exactly what the, timing was, but. Professor C: Yeah u I don't disagree with it the on the only thing is that, What you actually will end {disfmarker} en end up with is something, i it's all compromised, right, so, the string that you end up with isn't, actually, what happened. But it's {disfmarker} it's the best compromise that a group of people scratching their heads could come up with to describe what happened. PhD D: And it's more accurate than, phone labels. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: But. And it's more accurate than the {disfmarker} than the dictionary or, if you've got a pronunciation uh lexicon that has three or four, Grad F: The word. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: this might be have been the fifth one that you tr that you pruned or whatever, PhD D: So it's like a continuum. PhD G: Right. Professor C: so sure. PhD D: It's {disfmarker} you're going all the way down, PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: yeah. PhD G: That's what I meant is {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: an and in some places it would fill in, So {disfmarker} the kinds of gestural features are not everywhere. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} PhD D: Right. PhD G: So there are some things that you don't have access to either from your ear or the spectrogram, PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD G: but you know what phone it was and that's about all you can {disfmarker} all you can say. PhD D: Right. PhD G: And then there are other cases where, nasality, voicing {disfmarker} PhD D: It's basically just having, multiple levels of {disfmarker} of, information and marking, on the signal. PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Well the other difference is that the {disfmarker} the features, are not synchronous, PhD G: Right. Grad F: right. They overlap each other in weird ways. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. Grad F: So it's not a strictly one - dimensional signal. Professor C: Right. Grad F: So I think that's sorta qualitatively different. PhD G: Right. You can add the features in, uh, but it'll be underspecified. Postdoc B: Hmm. PhD G: Th - there'll be no way for you to actually mark what was said completely by features. Grad F: Well not with our current system but you could imagine designing a system, that the states were features, rather than phones. PhD G: And i if you're {disfmarker} Well, we {disfmarker} we've probably have a {vocalsound} separate, um, discussion of, uh {disfmarker} of whether you can do that. Postdoc B: That's {disfmarker} Well, {pause} isn't that {disfmarker} I thought that was, well but that {disfmarker} wasn't that kinda the direction? Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc B: I thought Professor C: Yeah, so I mean, what, what {disfmarker} where this is, I mean, I I want would like to have something that's useful to people other than those who are doing the specific kind of research I have in mind, so it should be something broader. But, The {disfmarker} but uh where I'm coming from is, uh, we're coming off of stuff that Larry Saul did with {disfmarker} with, um, uh, John Dalan and Muzim Rahim in which, uh, they, uh, have, um, a m a multi - band system that is, uh, trained through a combination of gradient learning an and EM, to {pause} um, estimate, uh, {vocalsound} the, uh, value for m for {disfmarker} for a particular feature. OK. And this is part of a larger, image that John Dalan has about how the human brain does it in which he's sort of imagining that, individual frequency channels are coming up with their own estimate, of {disfmarker} of these, these kinds of {disfmarker} something like this. Might not be, you know, exact features that, Jakobson thought of or something. But I mean you know some, something like that. Some kind of low - level features, which are not, fully, you know, phone classification. And the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} th this particular image, of how thi how it's done, is that, then given all of these estimates at that level, there's a level above it, then which is {disfmarker} is making, some kind of sound unit classification such as, you know, phone and {disfmarker} and, you know. You could argue what, what a sound unit should be, and {disfmarker} and so forth. But that {disfmarker} that's sort of what I was imagining doing, um, and {disfmarker} but it's still open within that whether you would have an intermediate level in which it was actually phones, or not. You wouldn't necessarily have to. Um, but, Again, I wouldn't wanna, wouldn't want what we {disfmarker} we produced to be so, know, local in perspective that it {disfmarker} it was matched, what we were thinking of doing one week, And {disfmarker} and, and, you know, what you're saying is absolutely right. That, that if we, can we should put in, uh, another level of, of description there if we're gonna get into some of this low - level stuff. PhD D: Well, you know, um {disfmarker} I mean if we're talking about, having the, annotators annotate these kinds of features, it seems like, You know, you {disfmarker} The {disfmarker} the question is, do they do that on, meeting data? Or do they do that on, Switchboard? Grad F: That's what I was saying, Postdoc B: W Well it seems like you could do both. Grad F: maybe meeting data isn't the right corpus. Postdoc B: I mean, I was thinking that it would be interesting, to do it with respect to, parts of Switchboard anyway, in terms of, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} partly to see, if you could, generate first guesses at what the articulatory feature would be, based on the phone representation at that lower level. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: It might be a time gain. But also in terms of comparability of, um, Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Well cuz the yeah, and then also, if you did it on Switchboard, you would have, the full continuum of transcriptions. Postdoc B: what you gain Yep. PhD D: You'd have it, from the lowest level, the ac acoustic features, then you'd have the, you know, the phonetic level that Steve did, Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Yeah that {disfmarker} that's all I was thinking about. Postdoc B: And you could tell that {disfmarker} PhD D: and, yeah. PhD G: it is telephone band, so, the bandwidth might be {disfmarker} PhD D: It'd be a complete, set then. Postdoc B: And you get the relative gain up ahead. Professor C: It's so it's a little different. So I mean i we'll see wha how much we can, uh, get the people to do, and how much money we'll have and all this sort of thing, PhD G: Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD D: But it {disfmarker} it might be good to do what Jane was saying uh, you know, seed it, with, guesses about what we think the features are, based on, you know, the phone or Steve's transcriptions or something. to make it quicker. Professor C: but, Might be do both. Grad F: Alright, so based on the phone transcripts they would all be synchronous, but then you could imagine, nudging them here and there. PhD D: Adjusting? Yeah, exactly. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD D: Scoot the voicing over a little, because {disfmarker} Grad F: Right. Professor C: Well I think what {disfmarker} I mean I'm {disfmarker} I'm a l little behind in what they're doing, now, and, uh, the stuff they're doing on Switchboard now. But I think that, Steve and the gang are doing, something with an automatic system first and then doing some adjustment. As I re as I recall. So I mean that's probably the right way to go anyway, is to {disfmarker} is to start off with an automatic system with a pretty rich pronunciation dictionary that, that, um, you know, tries, to label it all. And then, people go through and fix it. Postdoc B: So in {disfmarker} in our case you'd think about us s starting with maybe the regular dictionary entry, and then? Or {pause} would we {disfmarker} Professor C: Well, regular dictionary, I mean, this is a pretty rich dictionary. It's got, got a fair number of pronunciations in it Postdoc B: But {disfmarker} PhD D: Or you could start from the {disfmarker} if we were gonna, do the same set, of sentences that Steve had, done, we could start with those transcriptions. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. So I was thinking {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: That's actually what I was thinking, is tha {disfmarker} PhD D: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: the problem is when you run, uh, if you run a regular dictionary, um, even if you have variants, in there, which most people don't, you don't always get, out, the actual pronunciations, PhD D: Yeah. PhD G: so that's why the human transcriber's giving you the {disfmarker} that pronunciation, Postdoc B: Yeah. Oh. Professor C: Actually maybe they're using phone recognizers. PhD G: and so y they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} I thought that they were {disfmarker} Professor C: Is that what they're doing? Grad F: They are. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: we should catch up on what Steve is, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: uh {disfmarker} I think that would be a good i good idea. Professor C: Yeah, so I think that i i we also don't have, I mean, we've got a good start on it, but we don't have a really good, meeting, recorder or recognizer or transcriber or anything yet, so. So, I mean another way to look at this is to, is to, uh, do some stuff on Switchboard which has all this other, stuff to it. PhD G: Yeah. Professor C: And then, um, As we get, further down the road and we can do more things ahead of time, we can, do some of the same things to the meeting data. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: And I'm {disfmarker} and these people might {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they are, s most of them are trained with IPA. Professor C: Yeah Postdoc B: They'd be able to do phonetic - level coding, or articulatory. PhD D: Are they busy for the next couple years, or {disfmarker}? Postdoc B: Well, you know, I mean they, they {disfmarker} they're interested in continuing working with us, so {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} I, and this would be up their alley, so, we could {disfmarker} when the {disfmarker} when you d meet with, with John Ohala and find, you know what taxonomy you want to apply, then, they'd be, good to train onto it. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, this is, not an urgent thing at all, Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: just it came up. PhD D: It'd be very interesting though, to have {pause} that data. Postdoc B: I think so, too. Grad F: I wonder, how would you do a forced alignment? PhD G: Yeah. Might {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Interesting idea. Grad F: To {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} I mean, you'd wanna iterate, somehow. Yeah. It's interesting thing to think about. PhD D: Hmm. PhD G: It might be {disfmarker} Grad F: I mean you'd {disfmarker} you'd want models for spreading. PhD G: I was thinking it might be n PhD D: Of the f acoustic features? Grad F: Yeah. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Well it might be neat to do some, phonetic, features on these, nonword words. Are {disfmarker} are these kinds of words that people never {disfmarker} the" huh" s and the" hmm" s and the" huh" {vocalsound} and the uh {disfmarker} These k No, I'm serious. There are all these kinds of {pause} functional, uh, elements. I don't know what you call {pause} them. But not just fill pauses but all kinds of ways of {pause} interrupting {comment} and so forth. Grad F: Uh - huh. PhD G: And some of them are, {vocalsound} yeah," uh - huh" s, and" hmm" s, and," hmm!" " hmm" {comment}" OK" ," uh" {comment} Grunts, uh, that might be interesting. Postdoc B: He's got lip {disfmarker} {pause} lipsmacks. PhD G: In the meetings. Professor C: We should move on. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh, new version of, uh, presegmentation? PhD A: Uh, oh yeah, um, {vocalsound} I worked a little bit on the {disfmarker} on the presegmentation to {disfmarker} to get another version which does channel - specific, uh, speech - nonspeech detection. And, what I did is I used some normalized features which, uh, look in into the {disfmarker} which is normalized energy, uh, energy normalized by the mean over the channels and by the, minimum over the, other. within each channel. And to {disfmarker} to, mm, to, yeah, to normalize also loudness and {disfmarker} and modified loudness and things and that those special features actually are in my feature vector. Grad F: Oh. PhD A: And, and, therefore to be able to, uh, somewhat distinguish between foreground and background speech in {disfmarker} in the different {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} each channel. And, eh, I tested it on {disfmarker} on three or four meetings and it seems to work, well yeah, fairly well, I {disfmarker} I would say. There are some problems with the lapel mike. Grad F: Of course. PhD A: Yeah. Uh, yeah. Grad F: Wow that's great. PhD A: And. Grad F: So I {disfmarker} I understand that's what you were saying about your problem with, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. And. Yeah, and {disfmarker} and I had {disfmarker} I had, uh, specific problems with. Grad F: I get it. So new use ninetieth quartile, rather than, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: Wow. PhD A: Yeah {disfmarker} yeah, then {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I did some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} some things like that, Postdoc B: Interesting. PhD A: as there {disfmarker} there are some {disfmarker} some problems in, when, in the channel, there {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} the the speaker doesn't {disfmarker} doesn't talk much or doesn't talk at all. Then, the, yeah, there are {disfmarker} there are some problems with {disfmarker} with {disfmarker} with n with normalization, and, then, uh, there the system doesn't work at all. So, I'm {disfmarker} I'm glad that there is the {disfmarker} the digit part, where everybody is forced to say something, Professor C: Right. PhD A: so, that's {disfmarker} that's great for {disfmarker} for my purpose. And, the thing is I {disfmarker} I, then the evaluation of {disfmarker} of the system is a little bit hard, as I don't have any references. Grad F: Well we did the hand {disfmarker} the one by hand. PhD A: Yeah, that's the one {disfmarker} one wh where I do the training on so I can't do the evaluation on So the thing is, can the transcribers perhaps do some, some {disfmarker} some meetings in {disfmarker} in terms of speech - nonspeech in {disfmarker} in the specific channels? Grad F: Uh. Postdoc B: Well, I have {disfmarker} PhD D: Well won't you have that from their transcriptions? Postdoc B: Well, OK, so, now we need {disfmarker} Grad F: No, cuz we need is really tight. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: so, um, I think I might have done what you're requesting, though I did it in the service of a different thing. PhD A: Oh, great. Postdoc B: I have thirty minutes that I've more tightly transcribed with reference to individual channels. PhD A: OK. OK, that's great. That's great for me. Yeah, so. Postdoc B: And I could {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} Grad F: Hopefully that's not the same meeting that we did. Postdoc B: No, actually it's a different meeting. Grad F: Good. PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: So, um, e so the, you know, we have the, th they transcribe as if it's one channel with these {disfmarker} with the slashes to separate the overlapping parts. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then we run it through {disfmarker} then it {disfmarker} then I'm gonna edit it and I'm gonna run it through channelize which takes it into Dave Gelbart's form format. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then you have, all these things split across according to channel, and then that means that, if a person contributed more than once in a given, overlap during that time bend that {disfmarker} that two parts of the utterance end up together, it's the same channel, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and then I took his tool, and last night for the first thirty minutes of one of these transcripts, I, tightened up the, um, boundaries on individual speakers'channels, PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: cuz his {disfmarker} his interface allows me to have total flexibility in the time tags across the channels. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And {pause} um, so. PhD A: so, yeah {disfmarker} yeah, that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that's great, but what would be nice to have some more meetings, not just one meeting to {disfmarker} to be sure that {disfmarker} that, there is a system, PhD D: So, current {disfmarker} This week. Postdoc B: Yes. Might not be what you need. Grad F: Yeah, so if we could get a couple meetings done with that level of precision I think that would be a good idea. PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: Oh, OK. Uh, how {disfmarker} how m much time {disfmarker} so the meetings vary in length, what are we talking about in terms of the number of minutes you'd like to have as your {disfmarker} as your training set? PhD A: It seems to me that it would be good to have, a few minutes from {disfmarker} from different meetings, so. But I'm not sure about how much. Postdoc B: OK, now you're saying different meetings because of different speakers or because of different audio quality or both or {disfmarker}? PhD A: Both {disfmarker} both. Different {disfmarker} different number of speakers, different speakers, different {pause} conditions. Postdoc B: OK. Professor C: Yeah, we don't have that much variety in meetings yet, uh, I mean we have this meeting and the feature meeting and we have a couple others that we have uh, couple examples of. But {disfmarker} but, uh, PhD A: Yeah, m Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Grad E: Even probably with the gains {pause} differently will affect it, you mean {disfmarker} PhD A: Uh, not really as {disfmarker} Professor C: Poten - potentially. PhD A: uh, because of the normalization, yeah. Grad E: Oh, cuz you use the normalization? OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: We can try running {disfmarker} we haven't done this yet because, um, uh, Andreas an is {disfmarker} is gonna move over the SRI recognizer. i basically I ran out of machines at SRI, PhD A: OK. PhD G: cuz we're running the evals and I just don't have machine time there. But, once that's moved over, uh, hopefully in a {disfmarker} a couple days, then, we can take, um, what Jane just told us about as, the presegmented, {vocalsound} {nonvocalsound} the {disfmarker} the segmentations that you did, at level eight or som {comment} at some, threshold that Jane, tha {pause} right, and try doing, forced alignment. um, on the word strings. Grad F: Oh, shoot! PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: The pre presegment PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: yeah. PhD A: With the recognizer? Yeah. PhD G: And if it's good, then that will {disfmarker} that may give you a good boundary. Of course if it's good, we don't {disfmarker} then we're {disfmarker} we're fine, PhD A: Yeah. M PhD G: but, I don't know yet whether these, segments that contain a lot of pauses around the words, will work or not. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I would quite like to have some manually transcribed references for {disfmarker} for the system, as I'm not sure if {disfmarker} if it's really good to compare with {disfmarker} with some other automatic, found boundaries. PhD G: Yeah. Right. Postdoc B: Well, no, if we were to start with this and then tweak it h manually, would that {disfmarker} that would be OK? PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah {pause} sure. PhD G: They might be OK. Postdoc B: OK. PhD G: It {disfmarker} you know it really depends on a lot of things, PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: but, I would have maybe a transciber, uh, look at the result of a forced alignment and then adjust those. PhD A: Yeah. To a adjust them, or, yeah. Yeah, yeah. PhD G: That might save some time. PhD A: Yeah, great. PhD G: If they're horrible it won't help at all, but they might not be horrible. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: So {disfmarker} but I'll let you know when we, uh, have that. PhD A: OK, great. Postdoc B: How many minutes would you want from {disfmarker} I mean, we could {pause} easily, get a section, you know, like say a minute or so, from every meeting that we have so f from the newer ones that we're working on, everyone that we have. And then, should provide this. PhD A: If it's not the first minute of {disfmarker} of the meeting, that {disfmarker} that's OK with me, but, in {disfmarker} in the first minute, uh, Often there are some {disfmarker} some strange things going on which {disfmarker} which aren't really, well, for, which {disfmarker} which aren't re re really good. So. What {disfmarker} what I'd quite like, perhaps, is, to have, some five minutes of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of different meetings, so. Postdoc B: Somewhere not in the very beginning, five minutes, OK. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And, then I wanted to ask you just for my inter information, then, would you, be trai cuz I don't quite unders so, would you be training then, um, the segmenter so that, it could, on the basis of that, segment the rest of the meeting? So, if I give you like {pause} five minutes is the idea that this would then be applied to, uh, to, providing tighter time {pause} bands? PhD A: I {disfmarker} I could do a {disfmarker} a retraining with that, yeah. Postdoc B: Wow, interesting. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but I hope that I {disfmarker} I don't need to do it. Postdoc B: OK. PhD A: So, uh it c can be do in an unsupervised way. Postdoc B: Uh - huh. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Excellent. Excellent, OK. PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, but, for {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} for those three meetings whi which I {disfmarker} which I did, it seems to be, quite well, but, there are some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} as I said some problems with the lapel mike, but, perhaps we can do something with {disfmarker} with cross - correlations to, to get rid of the {disfmarker} of those. And. Yeah. That's {disfmarker} that's what I {disfmarker} that's my {pause} future work. Well {disfmarker} well what I want to do is to {disfmarker} to look into cross - correlations for {disfmarker} for removing those, false overlaps. Postdoc B: Wonderful. PhD G: Are the, um, wireless, different than the wired, mikes, at all? I mean, have you noticed any difference? PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, um, if {disfmarker} if there are any wired mikes in those meetings, or, uh, I have {disfmarker} have to loo have a look at them but, I'm {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} I think there's no difference between, PhD G: So it's just the lapel versus everything else? PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so then, if that's five minutes per meeting we've got like twelve minutes, twelve meetings, roughly, that I'm {disfmarker} that I've been working with, then {disfmarker} Professor C: Of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of the meetings that you're working with, how many of them are different, tha PhD A: No. Professor C: are there any of them that are different than, these two meetings? Postdoc B: Well {disfmarker} oh wa in terms of the speakers or the conditions or the? Professor C: Yeah, speakers. Sorry. PhD A: Yeah, that {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Um, we have different combinations of speakers. Professor C: So. Postdoc B: I mean, just from what I've seen, uh, there are some where, um, you're present or not present, and, then {disfmarker} then you have the difference between the networks group and this group PhD A: Yeah, I know, some of the NSA meetings, yeah. Professor C: Yeah. So I didn't know in the group you had if you had {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: so you have the networks meeting? PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yep, we do. Professor C: Do you have any of Jerry's meetings in your, pack, er, Postdoc B: Um, no. Professor C: No? Postdoc B: We could, I mean you {disfmarker} you recorded one last week or so. I could get that new one in this week {disfmarker} I get that new one in. Grad F: Yep. u PhD G: We're gonna be recording them every {pause} Monday, Professor C: Yeah. Cuz I think he really needs variety, PhD G: so {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Great. Professor C: and {disfmarker} and having as much variety for speaker certainly would be a big part of that I think. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so if I, OK, included {disfmarker} include, OK, then, uh, if I were to include all together samples from twelve meetings that would only take an hour and I could get the transcribers to do that right {disfmarker} I mean, what I mean is, that would be an hour sampled, and then they'd transcribe those {disfmarker} that hour, right? That's what I should do? Professor C: Yeah. And. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} that's. Postdoc B: I don't mean transcribe Professor C: Right. Ye - But you're {disfmarker} y Postdoc B: I mean {disfmarker} I mean adjust. So they get it into the multi - channel format and then adjust the timebands so it's precise. Professor C: So that should be faster than the ten times kind of thing, Postdoc B: Absolutely. I did {disfmarker} I did, um, uh, so, last night I did, uh, Professor C: yeah. Postdoc B: Oh gosh, well, last night, I did about half an hour in, three hours, which is not, terrific, Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: but, um, anyway, it's an hour and a half per {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. Well, that's probably. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Well, I can't calculate on my, {vocalsound} on my feet. PhD A: Do the transcribers actually start wi with, uh, transcribing new meetings, or {pause} are they? Postdoc B: Well, um they're still working {disfmarker} they still have enough to finish that I haven't assigned a new meeting, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: but the next, m m I was about to need to assign a new meeting and I was going to take it from one of the new ones, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and I could easily give them Jerry Feldman's meeting, no problem. And, then {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD G: So they're really running out of, data, prett I mean that's good. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Uh, that first set. PhD G: Um, OK. Professor C: They're running out of data unless we s make the decision that we should go over and start, uh, transcribing the other set. PhD G: So {disfmarker} Professor C: There {disfmarker} the first {disfmarker} the first half. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And so I was in the process of like editing them but this is wonderful news. PhD A: OK. Professor C: Alright. Postdoc B: We funded the experiment with, uh {disfmarker} also we were thinking maybe applying that that to getting the, Yeah, that'll be, very useful to getting the overlaps to be more precise all the way through. Professor C: So this, blends nicely into the update on transcripts. Postdoc B: Yes, it does. So, um, {comment} um, Liz, and {disfmarker} and Don, and I met this morning, in the BARCO room, with the lecture hall, Professor C: OK. PhD G: Yeah, please. Go ahead. And this afternoon. Postdoc B: and this afternoon, it drifted into the afternoon, {comment} {vocalsound} uh, concerning this issue of, um, the, well there's basically the issue of the interplay between the transcript format and the processing that, they need to do for, the SRI recognizer. And, um, well, so, I mentioned the process that I'm going through with the data, so, you know, I get the data back from the transcri Well, s uh, metaphorically, get the data back from the transcriber, and then I, check for simple things like spelling errors and things like that. And, um, I'm going to be doing a more thorough editing, with respect to consistency of the conventions. But they're {disfmarker} they're generally very good. And, then, I run it through, uh, the channelize program to get it into the multi - channel format, OK. And {pause} the, what we discussed this morning, I would summarize as saying that, um, these units that result, in a {disfmarker} a particular channel and a particular timeband, at {disfmarker} at that level, um, vary in length. And, um, {nonvocalsound} their recognizer would prefer that the units not be overly long. But it's really an empirical question, whether the units we get at this point through, just that process I described might be sufficient for them. So, as a first pass through, a first chance without having to do a lot of hand - editing, what we're gonna do, is, I'll run it through channelize, give them those data after I've done the editing process and be sure it's clean. And I can do that, pretty quickly, with just, that minimal editing, without having to hand - break things. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: And then we'll see if the units that we're getting, uh, with the {disfmarker} at that level, are sufficient. And maybe they don't need to be further broken down. And if they do need to be further broken down then maybe it just be piece - wise, maybe it won't be the whole thing. So, that's {disfmarker} that's what we were discussing, this morning as far as I {disfmarker} Among {disfmarker} PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: also we discussed some adaptational things, PhD G: Then lots of {disfmarker} Postdoc B: so it's like, PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} You know I hadn't, uh, incorporated, a convention explicitly to handle acronyms, for example, but if someone says, PZM it would be nice to have that be directly interpretable from, the transcript what they said, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: or Pi - uh Tcl {disfmarker} TCL I mean. It's like y it's {disfmarker} and so, um, I've {disfmarker} I've incorporated also convention, with that but that's easy to handle at the post editing phase, and I'll mention it to, transcribers for the next phase but that's OK. And then, a similar conv uh, convention for numbers. So if they say one - eighty - three versus one eight three. Um, and also I'll be, um, encoding, as I do my post - editing, the, things that are in curly brackets, which are clarificational material. And eh to incorporate, uh, keyword, at the beginning. So, it's gonna be either a gloss or it's gonna be a vocal sound like a, laugh or a cough, or, so forth. Or a non - vocal sound like a doors door - slam, and that can be easily done with a, you know, just a {disfmarker} one little additional thing in the, in the general format. PhD G: Yeah we j we just needed a way to, strip, you know, all the comments, all the things th the {disfmarker} that linguist wants but the recognizer can't do anything with. Um, but to keep things that we mapped to like reject models, or, you know, uh, mouth noise, or, cough. And then there's this interesting issue Jane brought up which I hadn't thought about before but I was, realizing as I went through the transcripts, that there are some noises like, um, well the {disfmarker} good example was an inbreath, where a transcriber working from, the mixed, signal, doesn't know whose breath it is, Grad F: Right. PhD G: and they've been assigning it to someone that may or may not be correct. And what we do is, if it's a breath sound, you know, a sound from the speaker, we map it, to, a noise model, like a mouth - noise model in the recognizer, and, yeah, it probably doesn't hurt that much once in a while to have these, but, if they're in the wrong channel, that's, not a good idea. And then there's also, things like door - slams that's really in no one's channel, they're like {disfmarker} it's in the room. PhD A: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: And {pause} uh, Jane had this nice, uh, idea of having, like an extra, uh couple tiers, Grad F: An extra channel. Postdoc B: Yeah. I've been {disfmarker} I've been adding that to the ones I've been editing. PhD G: yeah. And we were thinking, that is useful also when there's uncertainties. So if they hear a breath and they don't know who breath it is it's better to put it in that channel than to put it in the speaker's channel because maybe it was someone else's breath, or {disfmarker} Uh, so I think that's a good {disfmarker} you can always clean that up, post - processing. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So a lot of little details, but I think we're, coming to some kinda closure, on that. So the idea is then, uh, Don can take, uh, Jane's post - processed channelized version, and, with some scripts, you know, convert that to {disfmarker} to a reference for the recognizer and we can, can run these. So {pause} when that's, ready {disfmarker} you know, as soon as that's ready, and as soon as the recognizer is here we can get, twelve hours of force - aligned and recognized data. And, you know, start, working on it, Postdoc B: And {disfmarker} PhD G: so we're, I dunno a coup a week or two away I would say from, uh, if {disfmarker} if that process is automatic once we get your post - process, transcript. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. And that doesn't {disfmarker} the amount of editing that it would require is not very much either. I'm just hoping that the units that are provided in that way, {nonvocalsound} will be sufficient cuz I would save a lot of, uh, time, dividing things. PhD G: Yeah, some of them are quite long. Just from {disfmarker} I dunno how long were {disfmarker} you did one? Grad E: I saw a couple, {vocalsound} around twenty seconds, and that was just without looking too hard for it, so, I would imagine that there might be some that are longer. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Well n One question, e w would that be a single speaker or is that multiple speakers overlapping? Grad E: No. No, but if we're gonna segment it, like if there's one speaker in there, that says" OK" or something, right in the middle, it's gonna have a lot of dead time around it, PhD G: Right. It's not the {disfmarker} it's not the fact that we can't process a twenty second segment, it's the fact that, there's twenty seconds in which to place one word in the wrong place Grad E: so it's not {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Yeah. Grad E: Yeah. PhD G: You know, if {disfmarker} if someone has a very short utterance there, and that's where, we, might wanna have this individual, you know, ha have your pre pre - process input. PhD A: Yep. Yeah. Sure. Postdoc B: That's very important. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I thought that perhaps the transcribers could start then from the {disfmarker} those mult multi - channel, uh, speech - nonspeech detections, if they would like to. PhD G: And I just don't know, I have to run it. Postdoc B: In {disfmarker} in doing the hand - marking? PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yeah that's what I was thinking, too. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So that's probably what will happen, but we'll try it this way and see. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: I mean it's probably good enough for force - alignment. If it's not then we're really {disfmarker} then we def definitely PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: uh, but for free recognition I'm {disfmarker} it'll probably not be good enough. We'll probably get lots of errors because of the cross - talk, and, noises and things. PhD A: Yep. Professor C: Good s I think that's probably our agenda, or starting up there. Postdoc B: Oh I wanted to ask one thing, the microphones {disfmarker} the new microphones, Professor C: Yeah? K. Postdoc B: when do we get, uh? Grad F: Uh, they said it would take about a week. Postdoc B: Oh, exciting. K. K. Professor C: K. PhD D: You ordered them already? Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Great. PhD G: So what happens to our old microphones? Professor C: They go where old microphones go. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} PhD G: Do we give them to someone, or {disfmarker}? Grad F: Well the only thing we're gonna have extra, for now, PhD G: We don't have more receivers, we just have {disfmarker} Grad F: Right, we don so the only thing we'll have extra now is just the lapel. PhD G: Right. Grad F: Not {disfmarker} not the, bodypack, just the lapel. PhD G: Just the lapel itself. Grad F: Um, and then one of the {disfmarker} one of those. Since, what I decided to do, on Morgan's suggestion, was just get two, new microphones, um, and try them out. And then, if we like them we'll get more. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: OK. Grad F: Since they're {disfmarker} they're like two hundred bucks a piece, we won't, uh, at least try them out. PhD D: So it's a replacement for this headset mike? Grad F: Yep. Yep. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And they're gonna do the wiring for us. PhD D: What's the, um, style of the headset? Grad F: It's, um, it's by Crown, and it's one of these sort of mount around the ear thingies, and, uh, when I s when I mentioned that we thought it was uncomfortable he said it was a common problem with the Sony. And this is how apparently a lot of people are getting around it. PhD D: Hmm. Grad F: And I checked on the web, and every site I went to, raved about this particular mike. It's apparently comfortable and stays on the head well, so we'll see if it's any good. But, uh, I think it's promising. Postdoc B: You said it was used by aerobics instructors? Grad F: Yep. Yep, so it was {disfmarker} it was advertised for performers Postdoc B: That says a lot. Grad E: Hmm. Professor C: For the recor for the record Adam is not a paid employee or a consultant of Crown. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Excuse me? Postdoc B: Oh. Professor C: I said" For the record Adam is {disfmarker} is not a paid consultant or employee of Crown" . Grad F: Excuse me? PhD G: Right. Grad F: That's right. PhD G: However, he may be solicited after these meetings are distributed. Grad F: Well we're using the Crown P Z Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Don't worry about finishing your dissertation. Grad F: These are Crown aren't they? Professor C: Right. Grad F: The P Z Ms are Crown, aren't they? Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah, I thought they were. Professor C: You bet. You bet. Grad F: And they work very well. PhD G: Yes. Professor C: So if we go to a workshop about all this {disfmarker} this it's gonna be a meeting about meetings about meetings. OK. So. Grad F: And then it {disfmarker} we have to go to the planning session for that workshop. Professor C: Oh, yeah, what {disfmarker} Which'll be the meeting about the meeting about the meeting. PhD D: Oh, god. Grad F: Cuz then it would be a meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meetings. Postdoc B: Professor C: Yeah? Just start saying" M four" . Yeah, OK. Grad F: Yeah. M to the fourth. Professor C: Should we do the digits? Grad F: Yep, go for it. Professor C: OK. PhD A: S {pause} s Grad F: Pause between the lines, remember? Grad E: Excuse me. Grad F: OK. Professor C: OK. PhD G: Huh.

The group discussed the collection status for a set of connected digits recordings that are nearly complete and ready to be trained on a recognizer. Anticipated results were discussed in reference to results obtained for other digits corpora, i. e. Aurora and TI-digits.

tr-sq-90

tr-sq-90_0

What was said about the transcriber pool? Postdoc B: Alright. Professor C: So, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Um, so I wanted to discuss digits briefly, but that won't take too long. Professor C: Oh good. Right. OK, agenda items, Uh, we have digits, What else we got? PhD A: New version of the presegmentation. Professor C: New version of presegmentation. Postdoc B: Um, do we wanna say something about the, an update of the, uh, transcript? PhD G: Yeah, why don't you summarize the {disfmarker} Professor C: Update on transcripts. PhD G: And I guess that includes some {disfmarker} the filtering for the, the ASI refs, too. Postdoc B: Mmm. Professor C: Filtering for what? PhD G: For the references that we need to go from the {disfmarker} the {pause} fancy transcripts to the sort of {nonvocalsound} brain - dead. Postdoc B: It'll {disfmarker} it'll be {disfmarker} basically it'll be a re - cap of a meeting that we had jointly this morning. Professor C: Uh - huh. PhD G: With Don, as well. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Got it. Anything else more pressing than those things? So {disfmarker} So, why don't we just do those. You said yours was brief, so {disfmarker} Grad F: OK. OK well, the, w uh as you can see from the numbers on the digits we're almost done. The digits goes up to {pause} about four thousand. Um, and so, uh, we probably will be done with the TI - digits in, um, another couple weeks. um, depending on how many we read each time. So there were a bunch that we skipped. You know, someone fills out the form and then they're not at the meeting and so it's blank. Um, but those are almost all filled in as well. And so, once we're {disfmarker} it's done it would be very nice to train up a recognizer and actually start working with this data. PhD D: So we'll have a corpus that's the size of TI - digits? Grad F: And so {disfmarker} One particular test set of TI - digits. PhD D: Test set, OK. Grad F: So, I {disfmarker} I extracted, Ther - there was a file sitting around which people have used here as a test set. It had been randomized and so on PhD D: Grad F: and that's just what I used to generate the order. of these particular ones. PhD D: Oh! Great. Great. Professor C: So, I'm impressed by what we could do, Is take the standard training set for TI - digits, train up with whatever, you know, great features we think we have, uh for instance, and then test on uh this test set. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} Professor C: And presumably uh it should do reasonably well on that, and then, presumably, we should go to the distant mike, and it should do poorly. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: And then we should get really smart over the next year or two, and it {disfmarker} that should get better. Grad F: Right. And inc increase it by one or two percent, yeah. Professor C: Yeah, {vocalsound} Yeah. Grad F: Um, but, in order to do that we need to extract out the actual digits. Professor C: Right. Grad F: Um, so that {disfmarker} the reason it's not just a transcript is that there're false starts, and misreads, and miscues and things like that. And so I have a set of scripts and X Waves where you just select the portion, hit R, um, it tells you what the next one should be, and you just look for that. You know, so it {disfmarker} it'll put on the screen," The next set is six nine, nine two two" . And you find that, and, hit the key and it records it in a file in a particular format. Professor C: So is this {disfmarker} Grad F: And so the {disfmarker} the question is, should we have the transcribers do that or should we just do it? Well, some of us. I've been do I've done, eight meetings, something like that, just by hand. Just myself, rather. So it will not take long. Um {disfmarker} Professor C: Uh, what {disfmarker} what do you think? Postdoc B: My feeling is that we discussed this right before coffee and I think it's a {disfmarker} it's a fine idea partly because, um, it's not un unrelated to their present skill set, but it will add, for them, an extra dimension, it might be an interesting break for them. And also it is contributing to the, uh, c composition of the transcript cuz we can incorporate those numbers directly and it'll be a more complete transcript. So I'm {disfmarker} I think it's fine, that part. Grad F: There is {disfmarker} there is {disfmarker} Professor C: So you think it's fine to have the transcribers do it? Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah, OK. Grad F: There's one other small bit, which is just entering the information which at s which is at the top of this form, onto the computer, to go along with the {disfmarker} where the digits are recorded automatically. PhD D: Good. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And so it's just, you know, typing in name, times {disfmarker} time, date, and so on. Um, which again either they can do, but it is, you know, firing up an editor, or, again, I can do. Or someone else can do. Postdoc B: And, that, you know, I'm not, that {disfmarker} that one I'm not so sure if it's into the {disfmarker} the, things that, I, wanted to use the hours for, because the, the time that they'd be spending doing that they wouldn't be able to be putting more words on. Professor C: Mmm. Postdoc B: But that's really your choice, it's your {disfmarker} PhD D: So are these two separate tasks that can happen? Or do they have to happen at the same time before {disfmarker} Grad F: No they don't have {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} you have to enter the data before, you do the second task, but they don't have to happen at the same time. PhD D: OK. Grad F: So it's {disfmarker} it's just I have a file whi which has this information on it, and then when you start using my scripts, for extracting the times, it adds the times at the bottom of the file. And so, um, I mean, it's easy to create the files and leave them blank, and so actually we could do it in either order. PhD D: Oh, OK. Grad F: Um, it's {disfmarker} it's sort of nice to have the same person do it just as a double - check, to make sure you're entering for the right person. But, either way. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah just by way of uh, uh, a uh, order of magnitude, uh, um, we've been working with this Aurora, uh data set. And, uh, the best score, on the, nicest part of the data, that is, where you've got training and test set that are basically the same kinds of noise and so forth, uh, is about, uh {disfmarker} I think the best score was something like five percent, uh, error, per digit. PhD A: Per digit. Professor C: So, that {disfmarker} Grad F: Per digit. Professor C: You're right. So if you were doing {pause} ten digit, uh, recognition, {vocalsound} you would really be in trouble. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} The point there, and this is uh car noise uh, uh things, but {disfmarker} but real {disfmarker} real situation, PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: well," real" , Um, the {disfmarker} uh there's one microphone that's close, that they have as {disfmarker} as this sort of thing, close versus distant. Uh but in a car, instead of {disfmarker} instead of having a projector noise it's {disfmarker} it's car noise. Uh but it wasn't artificially added to get some {disfmarker} some artificial signal - to - noise ratio. It was just people driving around in a car. So, that's {disfmarker} that's an indication, uh that was with, many sites competing, and this was the very best score and so forth, so. More typical numbers like PhD D: Although the models weren't, that good, right? I mean, the models are pretty crappy? Professor C: You're right. I think that we could have done better on the models, but the thing is that we got {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} this is the kind of typical number, for all of the, uh, uh, things in this task, all of the, um, languages. And so I {disfmarker} I think we'd probably {disfmarker} the models would be better in some than in others. Um, so, uh. Anyway, just an indication once you get into this kind of realm even if you're looking at connected digits it can be pretty hard. PhD D: Hmm. Postdoc B: Hmm. It's gonna be fun to see how we, compare at this. Very exciting. s @ @. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: How did we do on the TI - digits? Grad F: Well the prosodics are so much different s it's gonna be, strange. I mean the prosodics are not the same as TI - digits, for example. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure how much of effect that will have. PhD D: H how do {disfmarker} PhD G: What do you mean, the prosodics? Grad F: Um, just what we were talking about with grouping. That with these, the grouping, there's no grouping at all, and so it's just {disfmarker} the only sort of discontinuity you have is at the beginning and the end. PhD G: So what are they doing in Aurora, are they reading actual phone numbers, Grad F: Aurora I don't know. I don't know what they do in Aurora. PhD G: or, a {disfmarker} a digit at a time, or {disfmarker}? Professor C: Uh, I'm not sure how {disfmarker} PhD G: Cuz it's {disfmarker} Professor C: no, no I mean it's connected {disfmarker} it's connected, uh, digits, PhD G: Connected. Professor C: yeah. But. Grad F: But {disfmarker} Right. PhD G: So there's also the {disfmarker} not just the prosody but the cross {disfmarker} the cross - word modeling is probably quite different. PhD D: H How Grad F: But in TI - digits, they're reading things like zip codes and phone numbers and things like that, PhD G: Right. PhD D: do we do on TI - digits? Grad F: so it's gonna be different. I don't remember. I mean, very good, right? Professor C: Yeah, I mean we were in the. Grad F: One and a half percent, two percent, something like that? Professor C: Uh, I th no I think we got under a percent, but it was {disfmarker} but it's {disfmarker} but I mean. The very best system that I saw in the literature was a point two five percent or something that somebody had at {disfmarker} at Bell Labs, or. Uh, but. But, uh, sort of pulling out all the stops. Grad F: Oh really? Postdoc B: s @ @. It s strikes me that there are more {disfmarker} each of them is more informative because it's so, random, Grad F: OK. Alright. PhD D: Hmm. Professor C: But I think a lot of systems sort of get half a percent, or three - quarters a percent, Grad F: Right. Professor C: and we're {disfmarker} we're in there somewhere. Grad F: But that {disfmarker} I mean it's really {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's close - talking mikes, no noise, clean signal, just digits, I mean, every everything is good. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: It's the beginning of time in speech recognition. Grad F: Yes, exactly. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And we've only recently got it to anywhere near human. PhD G: It's like the, single cell, you know, it's the beginning of life, PhD D: Pre - prehistory. PhD G: yeah. Grad F: And it's still like an order of magnitude worse than what humans do. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So. Professor C: When {disfmarker} When they're wide awake, yeah. Um, Grad F: Yeah. After coffee. Professor C: after coffee, you're right. Not after lunch. Grad F: OK, so, um, what I'll do then is I'll go ahead and enter, this data. And then, hand off to Jane, and the transcribers to do the actual extraction of the digits. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. One question I have that {disfmarker} that I mean, we wouldn't know the answer to now but might, do some guessing, but I was talking before about doing some model modeling of arti uh, uh, marking of articulatory, features, with overlap and so on. Grad F: Hmm. Professor C: And, and, um, On some subset. One thought might be to do this uh, on {disfmarker} on the digits, or some piece of the digits. Uh, it'd be easier, uh, and so forth. The only thing is I'm a little concerned that maybe the kind of phenomena, in w i i The reason for doing it is because the {disfmarker} the argument is that certainly with conversational speech, the stuff that we've looked at here before, um, just doing the simple mapping, from, um, the phone, to the corresponding features that you could look up in a book, uh, isn't right. It isn't actually right. In fact there's these overlapping processes where some voicing some up and then some, you know, some nasality is {disfmarker} comes in here, and so forth. And you do this gross thing saying" Well I guess it's this phone starting there" . So, uh, that's the reasoning. But, It could be that when we're reading digits, because it's {disfmarker} it's for such a limited set, that maybe {disfmarker} maybe that phenomenon doesn't occur as much. I don't know. Di - an anybody {disfmarker}? {pause} Do you have any {disfmarker}? {pause} Anybody have any opinion about that, Postdoc B: and that people might articulate more, and you that might end up with more {disfmarker} a closer correspondence. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad F: Yeah {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I agree. PhD D: Sort of less predictability, Grad F: That {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: and {disfmarker} You hafta {disfmarker} Grad F: It's a {disfmarker} Well {disfmarker} Would, this corpus really be the right one to even try that on? PhD G: Well it's definitely true that, when people are, reading, even if they're re - reading what, they had said spontaneously, that they have very different patterns. Mitch showed that, and some, dissertations have shown that. Professor C: Right. PhD G: So the fact that they're reading, first of all, whether they're reading in a room of, people, or rea you know, just the fact that they're reading will make a difference. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: And, depends what you're interested in. Professor C: See, I don't know. So, may maybe the thing will be do {disfmarker} to take some very small subset, I mean not have a big, program, but take a small set, uh, subset of the conversational speech and a small subset of the digits, and {pause} look and {disfmarker} and just get a feeling for it. Um, just take a look. Really. Postdoc B: H That could {disfmarker} could be an interesting design, too, cuz then you'd have the com the comparison of the, uh, predictable speech versus the less predictable speech Professor C: Cuz I don't think anybody is, I at least, I don't know, of anybody, uh, well, I don't know, {vocalsound} the answers. PhD D: Hey. Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: and maybe you'd find that it worked in, in the, case of the pr of the, uh, non - predictable. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: Hafta think about, the particular acoustic features to mark, too, because, I mean, some things, they wouldn't be able to mark, like, uh, you know, uh, tense lax. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Some things are really difficult. You know, Postdoc B: Well. PhD D: just listening. Grad F: M I think we can get Ohala in to, give us some advice on that. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: Also I thought you were thinking of a much more restricted set of features, that {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah, but I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was, like he said, {vocalsound} I was gonna bring John in and ask John what he thought. Postdoc B: Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. Professor C: Right. But I mean you want {disfmarker} you want it be restrictive but you also want it to {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} to have coverage. Grad F: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah Professor C: You know i you should. It should be such that if you, if you, uh, if you had o um, all of the features, determined that you {disfmarker} that you were uh ch have chosen, that that would tell you, uh, in the steady - state case, uh, the phone. So, um. Postdoc B: OK. Grad F: Even, I guess with vowels that would be pretty hard, wouldn't it? To identify actually, you know, which one it is? Postdoc B: It would seem to me that the points of articulation would be m more, g uh, I mean that's {disfmarker} I think about articulatory features, I think about, points of articulation, which means, uh, rather than vowels. Grad F: Yeah. PhD D: Points of articulation? What do you mean? Postdoc B: So, is it, uh, bilabial or dental or is it, you know, palatal. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: Which {disfmarker} which are all like where {disfmarker} where your tongue comes to rest. Professor C: Place, place. PhD D: Place of ar place of articulation. Grad F: Uvular. PhD A: Place. Postdoc B: Place. Thank you, what {disfmarker} whatev whatever I s said, that's {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK. Postdoc B: I really meant place. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK, I see. Professor C: Yeah. OK we got our jargon then, OK. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh. PhD G: Well it's also, there's, really a difference between, the pronunciation models in the dictionary, and, the pronunciations that people produce. And, so, You get, some of that information from Steve's work on the {disfmarker} on the labeling Professor C: Right. Grad F: Right. PhD G: and it really, I actually think that data should be used more. That maybe, although I think the meeting context is great, that he has transcriptions that give you the actual phone sequence. And you can go from {disfmarker} not from that to the articulatory features, but that would be a better starting point for marking, the gestural features, then, data where you don't have that, because, we {disfmarker} you wanna know, both about the way that they're producing a certain sound, and what kinds of, you know what kinds of, phonemic, differences you get between these, transcribed, sequences and the dictionary ones. Professor C: Well you might be right that mi might be the way at getting at, what I was talking about, but the particular reason why I was interested in doing that was because I remember, when that happened, and, John Ohala was over here and he was looking at the spectrograms of the more difficult ones. Uh, he didn't know what to say, about, what is the sequence of phones there. They came up with some compromise. Because that really wasn't what it look like. It didn't look like a sequence of phones Grad F: Right. PhD G: Right. Professor C: it look like this blending thing happening here and here and here. Grad F: Yeah, so you have this feature here, and, overlap, yeah. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: There was no name for that. PhD G: But {disfmarker} Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: But it still is {disfmarker} there's a {disfmarker} there are two steps. One {disfmarker} you know, one is going from a dictionary pronunciation of something, like," gonna see you tomorrow" , Grad F: And {disfmarker} Or" gonta" . Professor C: Right. Yeah. PhD G: it could be" going to" or" gonna" or" gonta s" you know. Professor C: Right. PhD G: And, yeah." Gonna see you tomorrow" , uh," guh see you tomorrow" . And, that it would be nice to have these, intermediate, or these {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} these reduced pronunciations that those transcribers had marked or to have people mark those as well. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Because, it's not, um, that easy to go from the, dictionary, word pronuncia the dictionary phone pronunciation, to the gestural one without this intermediate or a syllable level kind of, representation. Grad F: Well I don't think Morgan's suggesting that we do that, though. Professor C: Do you mean, PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Yeah, I mean, I I I'm jus at the moment of course we're just talking about what, to provide as a tool for people to do research who have different ideas about how to do it. So for instance, you might have someone who just has a wor has words with states, and has uh {disfmarker} uh, comes from articulatory gestures to that. And someone else, might actually want some phonetic uh intermediate thing. So I think it would be {disfmarker} be best to have all of it if we could. But {pause} um, Grad F: But {disfmarker} What I'm imagining is a score - like notation, where each line is a particular feature. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Right, Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: so you would say, you know, it's voiced through here, and so you have label here, and you have nas nasal here, and, they {disfmarker} they could be overlapping in all sorts of bizarre ways that don't correspond to the timing on phones. Professor C: I mean this is the kind of reason why {disfmarker} I remember when at one of the Switchboard, workshops, that uh when we talked about doing the transcription project, Dave Talkin said," can't be done" . Grad F: Right. Professor C: He was {disfmarker} he was, what {disfmarker} what he meant was that this isn't, you know, a sequence of phones, and when you actually look at Switchboard that's, not what you see, and, you know. And. It, Grad F: And in {disfmarker} in fact the inter - annotator agreement was not that good, right? On the harder ones? Professor C: yeah I mean it was PhD G: It depends how you look at it, and I {disfmarker} I understand what you're saying about this, kind of transcription exactly, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: because I've seen {disfmarker} you know, where does the voicing bar start and so forth. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: All I'm saying is that, it is useful to have that {disfmarker} the transcription of what was really said, and which syllables were reduced. Uh, if you're gonna add the features it's also useful to have some level of representation which is, is a reduced {disfmarker} it's a pronunciation variant, that currently the dictionaries don't give you Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: because if you add them to the dictionary and you run recognition, you, you add confusion. Professor C: Right. Right. PhD G: So people purposely don't add them. So it's useful to know which variant was {disfmarker} was produced, at least at the phone level. PhD D: So it would be {disfmarker} it would be great if we had, either these kind of, labelings on, the same portion of Switchboard that Steve marked, or, Steve's type markings on this data, with these. PhD G: Right. That's all, I mean. Exactly. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Exactly. Professor C: Yeah, no I {disfmarker} I don't disagree with that. PhD G: And Steve's type is fairly {disfmarker} it's not that slow, uh, uh, I dunno exactly what the, timing was, but. Professor C: Yeah u I don't disagree with it the on the only thing is that, What you actually will end {disfmarker} en end up with is something, i it's all compromised, right, so, the string that you end up with isn't, actually, what happened. But it's {disfmarker} it's the best compromise that a group of people scratching their heads could come up with to describe what happened. PhD D: And it's more accurate than, phone labels. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: But. And it's more accurate than the {disfmarker} than the dictionary or, if you've got a pronunciation uh lexicon that has three or four, Grad F: The word. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: this might be have been the fifth one that you tr that you pruned or whatever, PhD D: So it's like a continuum. PhD G: Right. Professor C: so sure. PhD D: It's {disfmarker} you're going all the way down, PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: yeah. PhD G: That's what I meant is {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: an and in some places it would fill in, So {disfmarker} the kinds of gestural features are not everywhere. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} PhD D: Right. PhD G: So there are some things that you don't have access to either from your ear or the spectrogram, PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD G: but you know what phone it was and that's about all you can {disfmarker} all you can say. PhD D: Right. PhD G: And then there are other cases where, nasality, voicing {disfmarker} PhD D: It's basically just having, multiple levels of {disfmarker} of, information and marking, on the signal. PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Well the other difference is that the {disfmarker} the features, are not synchronous, PhD G: Right. Grad F: right. They overlap each other in weird ways. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. Grad F: So it's not a strictly one - dimensional signal. Professor C: Right. Grad F: So I think that's sorta qualitatively different. PhD G: Right. You can add the features in, uh, but it'll be underspecified. Postdoc B: Hmm. PhD G: Th - there'll be no way for you to actually mark what was said completely by features. Grad F: Well not with our current system but you could imagine designing a system, that the states were features, rather than phones. PhD G: And i if you're {disfmarker} Well, we {disfmarker} we've probably have a {vocalsound} separate, um, discussion of, uh {disfmarker} of whether you can do that. Postdoc B: That's {disfmarker} Well, {pause} isn't that {disfmarker} I thought that was, well but that {disfmarker} wasn't that kinda the direction? Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc B: I thought Professor C: Yeah, so I mean, what, what {disfmarker} where this is, I mean, I I want would like to have something that's useful to people other than those who are doing the specific kind of research I have in mind, so it should be something broader. But, The {disfmarker} but uh where I'm coming from is, uh, we're coming off of stuff that Larry Saul did with {disfmarker} with, um, uh, John Dalan and Muzim Rahim in which, uh, they, uh, have, um, a m a multi - band system that is, uh, trained through a combination of gradient learning an and EM, to {pause} um, estimate, uh, {vocalsound} the, uh, value for m for {disfmarker} for a particular feature. OK. And this is part of a larger, image that John Dalan has about how the human brain does it in which he's sort of imagining that, individual frequency channels are coming up with their own estimate, of {disfmarker} of these, these kinds of {disfmarker} something like this. Might not be, you know, exact features that, Jakobson thought of or something. But I mean you know some, something like that. Some kind of low - level features, which are not, fully, you know, phone classification. And the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} th this particular image, of how thi how it's done, is that, then given all of these estimates at that level, there's a level above it, then which is {disfmarker} is making, some kind of sound unit classification such as, you know, phone and {disfmarker} and, you know. You could argue what, what a sound unit should be, and {disfmarker} and so forth. But that {disfmarker} that's sort of what I was imagining doing, um, and {disfmarker} but it's still open within that whether you would have an intermediate level in which it was actually phones, or not. You wouldn't necessarily have to. Um, but, Again, I wouldn't wanna, wouldn't want what we {disfmarker} we produced to be so, know, local in perspective that it {disfmarker} it was matched, what we were thinking of doing one week, And {disfmarker} and, and, you know, what you're saying is absolutely right. That, that if we, can we should put in, uh, another level of, of description there if we're gonna get into some of this low - level stuff. PhD D: Well, you know, um {disfmarker} I mean if we're talking about, having the, annotators annotate these kinds of features, it seems like, You know, you {disfmarker} The {disfmarker} the question is, do they do that on, meeting data? Or do they do that on, Switchboard? Grad F: That's what I was saying, Postdoc B: W Well it seems like you could do both. Grad F: maybe meeting data isn't the right corpus. Postdoc B: I mean, I was thinking that it would be interesting, to do it with respect to, parts of Switchboard anyway, in terms of, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} partly to see, if you could, generate first guesses at what the articulatory feature would be, based on the phone representation at that lower level. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: It might be a time gain. But also in terms of comparability of, um, Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Well cuz the yeah, and then also, if you did it on Switchboard, you would have, the full continuum of transcriptions. Postdoc B: what you gain Yep. PhD D: You'd have it, from the lowest level, the ac acoustic features, then you'd have the, you know, the phonetic level that Steve did, Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Yeah that {disfmarker} that's all I was thinking about. Postdoc B: And you could tell that {disfmarker} PhD D: and, yeah. PhD G: it is telephone band, so, the bandwidth might be {disfmarker} PhD D: It'd be a complete, set then. Postdoc B: And you get the relative gain up ahead. Professor C: It's so it's a little different. So I mean i we'll see wha how much we can, uh, get the people to do, and how much money we'll have and all this sort of thing, PhD G: Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD D: But it {disfmarker} it might be good to do what Jane was saying uh, you know, seed it, with, guesses about what we think the features are, based on, you know, the phone or Steve's transcriptions or something. to make it quicker. Professor C: but, Might be do both. Grad F: Alright, so based on the phone transcripts they would all be synchronous, but then you could imagine, nudging them here and there. PhD D: Adjusting? Yeah, exactly. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD D: Scoot the voicing over a little, because {disfmarker} Grad F: Right. Professor C: Well I think what {disfmarker} I mean I'm {disfmarker} I'm a l little behind in what they're doing, now, and, uh, the stuff they're doing on Switchboard now. But I think that, Steve and the gang are doing, something with an automatic system first and then doing some adjustment. As I re as I recall. So I mean that's probably the right way to go anyway, is to {disfmarker} is to start off with an automatic system with a pretty rich pronunciation dictionary that, that, um, you know, tries, to label it all. And then, people go through and fix it. Postdoc B: So in {disfmarker} in our case you'd think about us s starting with maybe the regular dictionary entry, and then? Or {pause} would we {disfmarker} Professor C: Well, regular dictionary, I mean, this is a pretty rich dictionary. It's got, got a fair number of pronunciations in it Postdoc B: But {disfmarker} PhD D: Or you could start from the {disfmarker} if we were gonna, do the same set, of sentences that Steve had, done, we could start with those transcriptions. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. So I was thinking {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: That's actually what I was thinking, is tha {disfmarker} PhD D: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: the problem is when you run, uh, if you run a regular dictionary, um, even if you have variants, in there, which most people don't, you don't always get, out, the actual pronunciations, PhD D: Yeah. PhD G: so that's why the human transcriber's giving you the {disfmarker} that pronunciation, Postdoc B: Yeah. Oh. Professor C: Actually maybe they're using phone recognizers. PhD G: and so y they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} I thought that they were {disfmarker} Professor C: Is that what they're doing? Grad F: They are. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: we should catch up on what Steve is, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: uh {disfmarker} I think that would be a good i good idea. Professor C: Yeah, so I think that i i we also don't have, I mean, we've got a good start on it, but we don't have a really good, meeting, recorder or recognizer or transcriber or anything yet, so. So, I mean another way to look at this is to, is to, uh, do some stuff on Switchboard which has all this other, stuff to it. PhD G: Yeah. Professor C: And then, um, As we get, further down the road and we can do more things ahead of time, we can, do some of the same things to the meeting data. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: And I'm {disfmarker} and these people might {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they are, s most of them are trained with IPA. Professor C: Yeah Postdoc B: They'd be able to do phonetic - level coding, or articulatory. PhD D: Are they busy for the next couple years, or {disfmarker}? Postdoc B: Well, you know, I mean they, they {disfmarker} they're interested in continuing working with us, so {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} I, and this would be up their alley, so, we could {disfmarker} when the {disfmarker} when you d meet with, with John Ohala and find, you know what taxonomy you want to apply, then, they'd be, good to train onto it. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, this is, not an urgent thing at all, Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: just it came up. PhD D: It'd be very interesting though, to have {pause} that data. Postdoc B: I think so, too. Grad F: I wonder, how would you do a forced alignment? PhD G: Yeah. Might {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Interesting idea. Grad F: To {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} I mean, you'd wanna iterate, somehow. Yeah. It's interesting thing to think about. PhD D: Hmm. PhD G: It might be {disfmarker} Grad F: I mean you'd {disfmarker} you'd want models for spreading. PhD G: I was thinking it might be n PhD D: Of the f acoustic features? Grad F: Yeah. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Well it might be neat to do some, phonetic, features on these, nonword words. Are {disfmarker} are these kinds of words that people never {disfmarker} the" huh" s and the" hmm" s and the" huh" {vocalsound} and the uh {disfmarker} These k No, I'm serious. There are all these kinds of {pause} functional, uh, elements. I don't know what you call {pause} them. But not just fill pauses but all kinds of ways of {pause} interrupting {comment} and so forth. Grad F: Uh - huh. PhD G: And some of them are, {vocalsound} yeah," uh - huh" s, and" hmm" s, and," hmm!" " hmm" {comment}" OK" ," uh" {comment} Grunts, uh, that might be interesting. Postdoc B: He's got lip {disfmarker} {pause} lipsmacks. PhD G: In the meetings. Professor C: We should move on. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh, new version of, uh, presegmentation? PhD A: Uh, oh yeah, um, {vocalsound} I worked a little bit on the {disfmarker} on the presegmentation to {disfmarker} to get another version which does channel - specific, uh, speech - nonspeech detection. And, what I did is I used some normalized features which, uh, look in into the {disfmarker} which is normalized energy, uh, energy normalized by the mean over the channels and by the, minimum over the, other. within each channel. And to {disfmarker} to, mm, to, yeah, to normalize also loudness and {disfmarker} and modified loudness and things and that those special features actually are in my feature vector. Grad F: Oh. PhD A: And, and, therefore to be able to, uh, somewhat distinguish between foreground and background speech in {disfmarker} in the different {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} each channel. And, eh, I tested it on {disfmarker} on three or four meetings and it seems to work, well yeah, fairly well, I {disfmarker} I would say. There are some problems with the lapel mike. Grad F: Of course. PhD A: Yeah. Uh, yeah. Grad F: Wow that's great. PhD A: And. Grad F: So I {disfmarker} I understand that's what you were saying about your problem with, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. And. Yeah, and {disfmarker} and I had {disfmarker} I had, uh, specific problems with. Grad F: I get it. So new use ninetieth quartile, rather than, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: Wow. PhD A: Yeah {disfmarker} yeah, then {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I did some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} some things like that, Postdoc B: Interesting. PhD A: as there {disfmarker} there are some {disfmarker} some problems in, when, in the channel, there {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} the the speaker doesn't {disfmarker} doesn't talk much or doesn't talk at all. Then, the, yeah, there are {disfmarker} there are some problems with {disfmarker} with {disfmarker} with n with normalization, and, then, uh, there the system doesn't work at all. So, I'm {disfmarker} I'm glad that there is the {disfmarker} the digit part, where everybody is forced to say something, Professor C: Right. PhD A: so, that's {disfmarker} that's great for {disfmarker} for my purpose. And, the thing is I {disfmarker} I, then the evaluation of {disfmarker} of the system is a little bit hard, as I don't have any references. Grad F: Well we did the hand {disfmarker} the one by hand. PhD A: Yeah, that's the one {disfmarker} one wh where I do the training on so I can't do the evaluation on So the thing is, can the transcribers perhaps do some, some {disfmarker} some meetings in {disfmarker} in terms of speech - nonspeech in {disfmarker} in the specific channels? Grad F: Uh. Postdoc B: Well, I have {disfmarker} PhD D: Well won't you have that from their transcriptions? Postdoc B: Well, OK, so, now we need {disfmarker} Grad F: No, cuz we need is really tight. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: so, um, I think I might have done what you're requesting, though I did it in the service of a different thing. PhD A: Oh, great. Postdoc B: I have thirty minutes that I've more tightly transcribed with reference to individual channels. PhD A: OK. OK, that's great. That's great for me. Yeah, so. Postdoc B: And I could {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} Grad F: Hopefully that's not the same meeting that we did. Postdoc B: No, actually it's a different meeting. Grad F: Good. PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: So, um, e so the, you know, we have the, th they transcribe as if it's one channel with these {disfmarker} with the slashes to separate the overlapping parts. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then we run it through {disfmarker} then it {disfmarker} then I'm gonna edit it and I'm gonna run it through channelize which takes it into Dave Gelbart's form format. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then you have, all these things split across according to channel, and then that means that, if a person contributed more than once in a given, overlap during that time bend that {disfmarker} that two parts of the utterance end up together, it's the same channel, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and then I took his tool, and last night for the first thirty minutes of one of these transcripts, I, tightened up the, um, boundaries on individual speakers'channels, PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: cuz his {disfmarker} his interface allows me to have total flexibility in the time tags across the channels. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And {pause} um, so. PhD A: so, yeah {disfmarker} yeah, that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that's great, but what would be nice to have some more meetings, not just one meeting to {disfmarker} to be sure that {disfmarker} that, there is a system, PhD D: So, current {disfmarker} This week. Postdoc B: Yes. Might not be what you need. Grad F: Yeah, so if we could get a couple meetings done with that level of precision I think that would be a good idea. PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: Oh, OK. Uh, how {disfmarker} how m much time {disfmarker} so the meetings vary in length, what are we talking about in terms of the number of minutes you'd like to have as your {disfmarker} as your training set? PhD A: It seems to me that it would be good to have, a few minutes from {disfmarker} from different meetings, so. But I'm not sure about how much. Postdoc B: OK, now you're saying different meetings because of different speakers or because of different audio quality or both or {disfmarker}? PhD A: Both {disfmarker} both. Different {disfmarker} different number of speakers, different speakers, different {pause} conditions. Postdoc B: OK. Professor C: Yeah, we don't have that much variety in meetings yet, uh, I mean we have this meeting and the feature meeting and we have a couple others that we have uh, couple examples of. But {disfmarker} but, uh, PhD A: Yeah, m Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Grad E: Even probably with the gains {pause} differently will affect it, you mean {disfmarker} PhD A: Uh, not really as {disfmarker} Professor C: Poten - potentially. PhD A: uh, because of the normalization, yeah. Grad E: Oh, cuz you use the normalization? OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: We can try running {disfmarker} we haven't done this yet because, um, uh, Andreas an is {disfmarker} is gonna move over the SRI recognizer. i basically I ran out of machines at SRI, PhD A: OK. PhD G: cuz we're running the evals and I just don't have machine time there. But, once that's moved over, uh, hopefully in a {disfmarker} a couple days, then, we can take, um, what Jane just told us about as, the presegmented, {vocalsound} {nonvocalsound} the {disfmarker} the segmentations that you did, at level eight or som {comment} at some, threshold that Jane, tha {pause} right, and try doing, forced alignment. um, on the word strings. Grad F: Oh, shoot! PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: The pre presegment PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: yeah. PhD A: With the recognizer? Yeah. PhD G: And if it's good, then that will {disfmarker} that may give you a good boundary. Of course if it's good, we don't {disfmarker} then we're {disfmarker} we're fine, PhD A: Yeah. M PhD G: but, I don't know yet whether these, segments that contain a lot of pauses around the words, will work or not. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I would quite like to have some manually transcribed references for {disfmarker} for the system, as I'm not sure if {disfmarker} if it's really good to compare with {disfmarker} with some other automatic, found boundaries. PhD G: Yeah. Right. Postdoc B: Well, no, if we were to start with this and then tweak it h manually, would that {disfmarker} that would be OK? PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah {pause} sure. PhD G: They might be OK. Postdoc B: OK. PhD G: It {disfmarker} you know it really depends on a lot of things, PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: but, I would have maybe a transciber, uh, look at the result of a forced alignment and then adjust those. PhD A: Yeah. To a adjust them, or, yeah. Yeah, yeah. PhD G: That might save some time. PhD A: Yeah, great. PhD G: If they're horrible it won't help at all, but they might not be horrible. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: So {disfmarker} but I'll let you know when we, uh, have that. PhD A: OK, great. Postdoc B: How many minutes would you want from {disfmarker} I mean, we could {pause} easily, get a section, you know, like say a minute or so, from every meeting that we have so f from the newer ones that we're working on, everyone that we have. And then, should provide this. PhD A: If it's not the first minute of {disfmarker} of the meeting, that {disfmarker} that's OK with me, but, in {disfmarker} in the first minute, uh, Often there are some {disfmarker} some strange things going on which {disfmarker} which aren't really, well, for, which {disfmarker} which aren't re re really good. So. What {disfmarker} what I'd quite like, perhaps, is, to have, some five minutes of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of different meetings, so. Postdoc B: Somewhere not in the very beginning, five minutes, OK. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And, then I wanted to ask you just for my inter information, then, would you, be trai cuz I don't quite unders so, would you be training then, um, the segmenter so that, it could, on the basis of that, segment the rest of the meeting? So, if I give you like {pause} five minutes is the idea that this would then be applied to, uh, to, providing tighter time {pause} bands? PhD A: I {disfmarker} I could do a {disfmarker} a retraining with that, yeah. Postdoc B: Wow, interesting. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but I hope that I {disfmarker} I don't need to do it. Postdoc B: OK. PhD A: So, uh it c can be do in an unsupervised way. Postdoc B: Uh - huh. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Excellent. Excellent, OK. PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, but, for {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} for those three meetings whi which I {disfmarker} which I did, it seems to be, quite well, but, there are some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} as I said some problems with the lapel mike, but, perhaps we can do something with {disfmarker} with cross - correlations to, to get rid of the {disfmarker} of those. And. Yeah. That's {disfmarker} that's what I {disfmarker} that's my {pause} future work. Well {disfmarker} well what I want to do is to {disfmarker} to look into cross - correlations for {disfmarker} for removing those, false overlaps. Postdoc B: Wonderful. PhD G: Are the, um, wireless, different than the wired, mikes, at all? I mean, have you noticed any difference? PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, um, if {disfmarker} if there are any wired mikes in those meetings, or, uh, I have {disfmarker} have to loo have a look at them but, I'm {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} I think there's no difference between, PhD G: So it's just the lapel versus everything else? PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so then, if that's five minutes per meeting we've got like twelve minutes, twelve meetings, roughly, that I'm {disfmarker} that I've been working with, then {disfmarker} Professor C: Of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of the meetings that you're working with, how many of them are different, tha PhD A: No. Professor C: are there any of them that are different than, these two meetings? Postdoc B: Well {disfmarker} oh wa in terms of the speakers or the conditions or the? Professor C: Yeah, speakers. Sorry. PhD A: Yeah, that {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Um, we have different combinations of speakers. Professor C: So. Postdoc B: I mean, just from what I've seen, uh, there are some where, um, you're present or not present, and, then {disfmarker} then you have the difference between the networks group and this group PhD A: Yeah, I know, some of the NSA meetings, yeah. Professor C: Yeah. So I didn't know in the group you had if you had {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: so you have the networks meeting? PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yep, we do. Professor C: Do you have any of Jerry's meetings in your, pack, er, Postdoc B: Um, no. Professor C: No? Postdoc B: We could, I mean you {disfmarker} you recorded one last week or so. I could get that new one in this week {disfmarker} I get that new one in. Grad F: Yep. u PhD G: We're gonna be recording them every {pause} Monday, Professor C: Yeah. Cuz I think he really needs variety, PhD G: so {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Great. Professor C: and {disfmarker} and having as much variety for speaker certainly would be a big part of that I think. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so if I, OK, included {disfmarker} include, OK, then, uh, if I were to include all together samples from twelve meetings that would only take an hour and I could get the transcribers to do that right {disfmarker} I mean, what I mean is, that would be an hour sampled, and then they'd transcribe those {disfmarker} that hour, right? That's what I should do? Professor C: Yeah. And. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} that's. Postdoc B: I don't mean transcribe Professor C: Right. Ye - But you're {disfmarker} y Postdoc B: I mean {disfmarker} I mean adjust. So they get it into the multi - channel format and then adjust the timebands so it's precise. Professor C: So that should be faster than the ten times kind of thing, Postdoc B: Absolutely. I did {disfmarker} I did, um, uh, so, last night I did, uh, Professor C: yeah. Postdoc B: Oh gosh, well, last night, I did about half an hour in, three hours, which is not, terrific, Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: but, um, anyway, it's an hour and a half per {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. Well, that's probably. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Well, I can't calculate on my, {vocalsound} on my feet. PhD A: Do the transcribers actually start wi with, uh, transcribing new meetings, or {pause} are they? Postdoc B: Well, um they're still working {disfmarker} they still have enough to finish that I haven't assigned a new meeting, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: but the next, m m I was about to need to assign a new meeting and I was going to take it from one of the new ones, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and I could easily give them Jerry Feldman's meeting, no problem. And, then {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD G: So they're really running out of, data, prett I mean that's good. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Uh, that first set. PhD G: Um, OK. Professor C: They're running out of data unless we s make the decision that we should go over and start, uh, transcribing the other set. PhD G: So {disfmarker} Professor C: There {disfmarker} the first {disfmarker} the first half. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And so I was in the process of like editing them but this is wonderful news. PhD A: OK. Professor C: Alright. Postdoc B: We funded the experiment with, uh {disfmarker} also we were thinking maybe applying that that to getting the, Yeah, that'll be, very useful to getting the overlaps to be more precise all the way through. Professor C: So this, blends nicely into the update on transcripts. Postdoc B: Yes, it does. So, um, {comment} um, Liz, and {disfmarker} and Don, and I met this morning, in the BARCO room, with the lecture hall, Professor C: OK. PhD G: Yeah, please. Go ahead. And this afternoon. Postdoc B: and this afternoon, it drifted into the afternoon, {comment} {vocalsound} uh, concerning this issue of, um, the, well there's basically the issue of the interplay between the transcript format and the processing that, they need to do for, the SRI recognizer. And, um, well, so, I mentioned the process that I'm going through with the data, so, you know, I get the data back from the transcri Well, s uh, metaphorically, get the data back from the transcriber, and then I, check for simple things like spelling errors and things like that. And, um, I'm going to be doing a more thorough editing, with respect to consistency of the conventions. But they're {disfmarker} they're generally very good. And, then, I run it through, uh, the channelize program to get it into the multi - channel format, OK. And {pause} the, what we discussed this morning, I would summarize as saying that, um, these units that result, in a {disfmarker} a particular channel and a particular timeband, at {disfmarker} at that level, um, vary in length. And, um, {nonvocalsound} their recognizer would prefer that the units not be overly long. But it's really an empirical question, whether the units we get at this point through, just that process I described might be sufficient for them. So, as a first pass through, a first chance without having to do a lot of hand - editing, what we're gonna do, is, I'll run it through channelize, give them those data after I've done the editing process and be sure it's clean. And I can do that, pretty quickly, with just, that minimal editing, without having to hand - break things. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: And then we'll see if the units that we're getting, uh, with the {disfmarker} at that level, are sufficient. And maybe they don't need to be further broken down. And if they do need to be further broken down then maybe it just be piece - wise, maybe it won't be the whole thing. So, that's {disfmarker} that's what we were discussing, this morning as far as I {disfmarker} Among {disfmarker} PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: also we discussed some adaptational things, PhD G: Then lots of {disfmarker} Postdoc B: so it's like, PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} You know I hadn't, uh, incorporated, a convention explicitly to handle acronyms, for example, but if someone says, PZM it would be nice to have that be directly interpretable from, the transcript what they said, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: or Pi - uh Tcl {disfmarker} TCL I mean. It's like y it's {disfmarker} and so, um, I've {disfmarker} I've incorporated also convention, with that but that's easy to handle at the post editing phase, and I'll mention it to, transcribers for the next phase but that's OK. And then, a similar conv uh, convention for numbers. So if they say one - eighty - three versus one eight three. Um, and also I'll be, um, encoding, as I do my post - editing, the, things that are in curly brackets, which are clarificational material. And eh to incorporate, uh, keyword, at the beginning. So, it's gonna be either a gloss or it's gonna be a vocal sound like a, laugh or a cough, or, so forth. Or a non - vocal sound like a doors door - slam, and that can be easily done with a, you know, just a {disfmarker} one little additional thing in the, in the general format. PhD G: Yeah we j we just needed a way to, strip, you know, all the comments, all the things th the {disfmarker} that linguist wants but the recognizer can't do anything with. Um, but to keep things that we mapped to like reject models, or, you know, uh, mouth noise, or, cough. And then there's this interesting issue Jane brought up which I hadn't thought about before but I was, realizing as I went through the transcripts, that there are some noises like, um, well the {disfmarker} good example was an inbreath, where a transcriber working from, the mixed, signal, doesn't know whose breath it is, Grad F: Right. PhD G: and they've been assigning it to someone that may or may not be correct. And what we do is, if it's a breath sound, you know, a sound from the speaker, we map it, to, a noise model, like a mouth - noise model in the recognizer, and, yeah, it probably doesn't hurt that much once in a while to have these, but, if they're in the wrong channel, that's, not a good idea. And then there's also, things like door - slams that's really in no one's channel, they're like {disfmarker} it's in the room. PhD A: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: And {pause} uh, Jane had this nice, uh, idea of having, like an extra, uh couple tiers, Grad F: An extra channel. Postdoc B: Yeah. I've been {disfmarker} I've been adding that to the ones I've been editing. PhD G: yeah. And we were thinking, that is useful also when there's uncertainties. So if they hear a breath and they don't know who breath it is it's better to put it in that channel than to put it in the speaker's channel because maybe it was someone else's breath, or {disfmarker} Uh, so I think that's a good {disfmarker} you can always clean that up, post - processing. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So a lot of little details, but I think we're, coming to some kinda closure, on that. So the idea is then, uh, Don can take, uh, Jane's post - processed channelized version, and, with some scripts, you know, convert that to {disfmarker} to a reference for the recognizer and we can, can run these. So {pause} when that's, ready {disfmarker} you know, as soon as that's ready, and as soon as the recognizer is here we can get, twelve hours of force - aligned and recognized data. And, you know, start, working on it, Postdoc B: And {disfmarker} PhD G: so we're, I dunno a coup a week or two away I would say from, uh, if {disfmarker} if that process is automatic once we get your post - process, transcript. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. And that doesn't {disfmarker} the amount of editing that it would require is not very much either. I'm just hoping that the units that are provided in that way, {nonvocalsound} will be sufficient cuz I would save a lot of, uh, time, dividing things. PhD G: Yeah, some of them are quite long. Just from {disfmarker} I dunno how long were {disfmarker} you did one? Grad E: I saw a couple, {vocalsound} around twenty seconds, and that was just without looking too hard for it, so, I would imagine that there might be some that are longer. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Well n One question, e w would that be a single speaker or is that multiple speakers overlapping? Grad E: No. No, but if we're gonna segment it, like if there's one speaker in there, that says" OK" or something, right in the middle, it's gonna have a lot of dead time around it, PhD G: Right. It's not the {disfmarker} it's not the fact that we can't process a twenty second segment, it's the fact that, there's twenty seconds in which to place one word in the wrong place Grad E: so it's not {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Yeah. Grad E: Yeah. PhD G: You know, if {disfmarker} if someone has a very short utterance there, and that's where, we, might wanna have this individual, you know, ha have your pre pre - process input. PhD A: Yep. Yeah. Sure. Postdoc B: That's very important. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I thought that perhaps the transcribers could start then from the {disfmarker} those mult multi - channel, uh, speech - nonspeech detections, if they would like to. PhD G: And I just don't know, I have to run it. Postdoc B: In {disfmarker} in doing the hand - marking? PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yeah that's what I was thinking, too. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So that's probably what will happen, but we'll try it this way and see. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: I mean it's probably good enough for force - alignment. If it's not then we're really {disfmarker} then we def definitely PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: uh, but for free recognition I'm {disfmarker} it'll probably not be good enough. We'll probably get lots of errors because of the cross - talk, and, noises and things. PhD A: Yep. Professor C: Good s I think that's probably our agenda, or starting up there. Postdoc B: Oh I wanted to ask one thing, the microphones {disfmarker} the new microphones, Professor C: Yeah? K. Postdoc B: when do we get, uh? Grad F: Uh, they said it would take about a week. Postdoc B: Oh, exciting. K. K. Professor C: K. PhD D: You ordered them already? Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Great. PhD G: So what happens to our old microphones? Professor C: They go where old microphones go. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} PhD G: Do we give them to someone, or {disfmarker}? Grad F: Well the only thing we're gonna have extra, for now, PhD G: We don't have more receivers, we just have {disfmarker} Grad F: Right, we don so the only thing we'll have extra now is just the lapel. PhD G: Right. Grad F: Not {disfmarker} not the, bodypack, just the lapel. PhD G: Just the lapel itself. Grad F: Um, and then one of the {disfmarker} one of those. Since, what I decided to do, on Morgan's suggestion, was just get two, new microphones, um, and try them out. And then, if we like them we'll get more. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: OK. Grad F: Since they're {disfmarker} they're like two hundred bucks a piece, we won't, uh, at least try them out. PhD D: So it's a replacement for this headset mike? Grad F: Yep. Yep. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And they're gonna do the wiring for us. PhD D: What's the, um, style of the headset? Grad F: It's, um, it's by Crown, and it's one of these sort of mount around the ear thingies, and, uh, when I s when I mentioned that we thought it was uncomfortable he said it was a common problem with the Sony. And this is how apparently a lot of people are getting around it. PhD D: Hmm. Grad F: And I checked on the web, and every site I went to, raved about this particular mike. It's apparently comfortable and stays on the head well, so we'll see if it's any good. But, uh, I think it's promising. Postdoc B: You said it was used by aerobics instructors? Grad F: Yep. Yep, so it was {disfmarker} it was advertised for performers Postdoc B: That says a lot. Grad E: Hmm. Professor C: For the recor for the record Adam is not a paid employee or a consultant of Crown. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Excuse me? Postdoc B: Oh. Professor C: I said" For the record Adam is {disfmarker} is not a paid consultant or employee of Crown" . Grad F: Excuse me? PhD G: Right. Grad F: That's right. PhD G: However, he may be solicited after these meetings are distributed. Grad F: Well we're using the Crown P Z Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Don't worry about finishing your dissertation. Grad F: These are Crown aren't they? Professor C: Right. Grad F: The P Z Ms are Crown, aren't they? Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah, I thought they were. Professor C: You bet. You bet. Grad F: And they work very well. PhD G: Yes. Professor C: So if we go to a workshop about all this {disfmarker} this it's gonna be a meeting about meetings about meetings. OK. So. Grad F: And then it {disfmarker} we have to go to the planning session for that workshop. Professor C: Oh, yeah, what {disfmarker} Which'll be the meeting about the meeting about the meeting. PhD D: Oh, god. Grad F: Cuz then it would be a meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meetings. Postdoc B: Professor C: Yeah? Just start saying" M four" . Yeah, OK. Grad F: Yeah. M to the fourth. Professor C: Should we do the digits? Grad F: Yep, go for it. Professor C: OK. PhD A: S {pause} s Grad F: Pause between the lines, remember? Grad E: Excuse me. Grad F: OK. Professor C: OK. PhD G: Huh.

decision was also made to delegate transcribers with the task of labelling a subset of digits or Switchboard data for fine-grained acoustic-phonetic features. Speaker fe008 will run selected Meeting Recorder data through channelize and determine whether the resulting units are of a sufficient length.

tr-sq-91

tr-sq-91_0

What did the group say about acoustic-phonetic analyses? Postdoc B: Alright. Professor C: So, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Um, so I wanted to discuss digits briefly, but that won't take too long. Professor C: Oh good. Right. OK, agenda items, Uh, we have digits, What else we got? PhD A: New version of the presegmentation. Professor C: New version of presegmentation. Postdoc B: Um, do we wanna say something about the, an update of the, uh, transcript? PhD G: Yeah, why don't you summarize the {disfmarker} Professor C: Update on transcripts. PhD G: And I guess that includes some {disfmarker} the filtering for the, the ASI refs, too. Postdoc B: Mmm. Professor C: Filtering for what? PhD G: For the references that we need to go from the {disfmarker} the {pause} fancy transcripts to the sort of {nonvocalsound} brain - dead. Postdoc B: It'll {disfmarker} it'll be {disfmarker} basically it'll be a re - cap of a meeting that we had jointly this morning. Professor C: Uh - huh. PhD G: With Don, as well. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Got it. Anything else more pressing than those things? So {disfmarker} So, why don't we just do those. You said yours was brief, so {disfmarker} Grad F: OK. OK well, the, w uh as you can see from the numbers on the digits we're almost done. The digits goes up to {pause} about four thousand. Um, and so, uh, we probably will be done with the TI - digits in, um, another couple weeks. um, depending on how many we read each time. So there were a bunch that we skipped. You know, someone fills out the form and then they're not at the meeting and so it's blank. Um, but those are almost all filled in as well. And so, once we're {disfmarker} it's done it would be very nice to train up a recognizer and actually start working with this data. PhD D: So we'll have a corpus that's the size of TI - digits? Grad F: And so {disfmarker} One particular test set of TI - digits. PhD D: Test set, OK. Grad F: So, I {disfmarker} I extracted, Ther - there was a file sitting around which people have used here as a test set. It had been randomized and so on PhD D: Grad F: and that's just what I used to generate the order. of these particular ones. PhD D: Oh! Great. Great. Professor C: So, I'm impressed by what we could do, Is take the standard training set for TI - digits, train up with whatever, you know, great features we think we have, uh for instance, and then test on uh this test set. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} Professor C: And presumably uh it should do reasonably well on that, and then, presumably, we should go to the distant mike, and it should do poorly. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: And then we should get really smart over the next year or two, and it {disfmarker} that should get better. Grad F: Right. And inc increase it by one or two percent, yeah. Professor C: Yeah, {vocalsound} Yeah. Grad F: Um, but, in order to do that we need to extract out the actual digits. Professor C: Right. Grad F: Um, so that {disfmarker} the reason it's not just a transcript is that there're false starts, and misreads, and miscues and things like that. And so I have a set of scripts and X Waves where you just select the portion, hit R, um, it tells you what the next one should be, and you just look for that. You know, so it {disfmarker} it'll put on the screen," The next set is six nine, nine two two" . And you find that, and, hit the key and it records it in a file in a particular format. Professor C: So is this {disfmarker} Grad F: And so the {disfmarker} the question is, should we have the transcribers do that or should we just do it? Well, some of us. I've been do I've done, eight meetings, something like that, just by hand. Just myself, rather. So it will not take long. Um {disfmarker} Professor C: Uh, what {disfmarker} what do you think? Postdoc B: My feeling is that we discussed this right before coffee and I think it's a {disfmarker} it's a fine idea partly because, um, it's not un unrelated to their present skill set, but it will add, for them, an extra dimension, it might be an interesting break for them. And also it is contributing to the, uh, c composition of the transcript cuz we can incorporate those numbers directly and it'll be a more complete transcript. So I'm {disfmarker} I think it's fine, that part. Grad F: There is {disfmarker} there is {disfmarker} Professor C: So you think it's fine to have the transcribers do it? Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah, OK. Grad F: There's one other small bit, which is just entering the information which at s which is at the top of this form, onto the computer, to go along with the {disfmarker} where the digits are recorded automatically. PhD D: Good. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And so it's just, you know, typing in name, times {disfmarker} time, date, and so on. Um, which again either they can do, but it is, you know, firing up an editor, or, again, I can do. Or someone else can do. Postdoc B: And, that, you know, I'm not, that {disfmarker} that one I'm not so sure if it's into the {disfmarker} the, things that, I, wanted to use the hours for, because the, the time that they'd be spending doing that they wouldn't be able to be putting more words on. Professor C: Mmm. Postdoc B: But that's really your choice, it's your {disfmarker} PhD D: So are these two separate tasks that can happen? Or do they have to happen at the same time before {disfmarker} Grad F: No they don't have {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} you have to enter the data before, you do the second task, but they don't have to happen at the same time. PhD D: OK. Grad F: So it's {disfmarker} it's just I have a file whi which has this information on it, and then when you start using my scripts, for extracting the times, it adds the times at the bottom of the file. And so, um, I mean, it's easy to create the files and leave them blank, and so actually we could do it in either order. PhD D: Oh, OK. Grad F: Um, it's {disfmarker} it's sort of nice to have the same person do it just as a double - check, to make sure you're entering for the right person. But, either way. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah just by way of uh, uh, a uh, order of magnitude, uh, um, we've been working with this Aurora, uh data set. And, uh, the best score, on the, nicest part of the data, that is, where you've got training and test set that are basically the same kinds of noise and so forth, uh, is about, uh {disfmarker} I think the best score was something like five percent, uh, error, per digit. PhD A: Per digit. Professor C: So, that {disfmarker} Grad F: Per digit. Professor C: You're right. So if you were doing {pause} ten digit, uh, recognition, {vocalsound} you would really be in trouble. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} The point there, and this is uh car noise uh, uh things, but {disfmarker} but real {disfmarker} real situation, PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: well," real" , Um, the {disfmarker} uh there's one microphone that's close, that they have as {disfmarker} as this sort of thing, close versus distant. Uh but in a car, instead of {disfmarker} instead of having a projector noise it's {disfmarker} it's car noise. Uh but it wasn't artificially added to get some {disfmarker} some artificial signal - to - noise ratio. It was just people driving around in a car. So, that's {disfmarker} that's an indication, uh that was with, many sites competing, and this was the very best score and so forth, so. More typical numbers like PhD D: Although the models weren't, that good, right? I mean, the models are pretty crappy? Professor C: You're right. I think that we could have done better on the models, but the thing is that we got {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} this is the kind of typical number, for all of the, uh, uh, things in this task, all of the, um, languages. And so I {disfmarker} I think we'd probably {disfmarker} the models would be better in some than in others. Um, so, uh. Anyway, just an indication once you get into this kind of realm even if you're looking at connected digits it can be pretty hard. PhD D: Hmm. Postdoc B: Hmm. It's gonna be fun to see how we, compare at this. Very exciting. s @ @. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: How did we do on the TI - digits? Grad F: Well the prosodics are so much different s it's gonna be, strange. I mean the prosodics are not the same as TI - digits, for example. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure how much of effect that will have. PhD D: H how do {disfmarker} PhD G: What do you mean, the prosodics? Grad F: Um, just what we were talking about with grouping. That with these, the grouping, there's no grouping at all, and so it's just {disfmarker} the only sort of discontinuity you have is at the beginning and the end. PhD G: So what are they doing in Aurora, are they reading actual phone numbers, Grad F: Aurora I don't know. I don't know what they do in Aurora. PhD G: or, a {disfmarker} a digit at a time, or {disfmarker}? Professor C: Uh, I'm not sure how {disfmarker} PhD G: Cuz it's {disfmarker} Professor C: no, no I mean it's connected {disfmarker} it's connected, uh, digits, PhD G: Connected. Professor C: yeah. But. Grad F: But {disfmarker} Right. PhD G: So there's also the {disfmarker} not just the prosody but the cross {disfmarker} the cross - word modeling is probably quite different. PhD D: H How Grad F: But in TI - digits, they're reading things like zip codes and phone numbers and things like that, PhD G: Right. PhD D: do we do on TI - digits? Grad F: so it's gonna be different. I don't remember. I mean, very good, right? Professor C: Yeah, I mean we were in the. Grad F: One and a half percent, two percent, something like that? Professor C: Uh, I th no I think we got under a percent, but it was {disfmarker} but it's {disfmarker} but I mean. The very best system that I saw in the literature was a point two five percent or something that somebody had at {disfmarker} at Bell Labs, or. Uh, but. But, uh, sort of pulling out all the stops. Grad F: Oh really? Postdoc B: s @ @. It s strikes me that there are more {disfmarker} each of them is more informative because it's so, random, Grad F: OK. Alright. PhD D: Hmm. Professor C: But I think a lot of systems sort of get half a percent, or three - quarters a percent, Grad F: Right. Professor C: and we're {disfmarker} we're in there somewhere. Grad F: But that {disfmarker} I mean it's really {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's close - talking mikes, no noise, clean signal, just digits, I mean, every everything is good. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: It's the beginning of time in speech recognition. Grad F: Yes, exactly. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And we've only recently got it to anywhere near human. PhD G: It's like the, single cell, you know, it's the beginning of life, PhD D: Pre - prehistory. PhD G: yeah. Grad F: And it's still like an order of magnitude worse than what humans do. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So. Professor C: When {disfmarker} When they're wide awake, yeah. Um, Grad F: Yeah. After coffee. Professor C: after coffee, you're right. Not after lunch. Grad F: OK, so, um, what I'll do then is I'll go ahead and enter, this data. And then, hand off to Jane, and the transcribers to do the actual extraction of the digits. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. One question I have that {disfmarker} that I mean, we wouldn't know the answer to now but might, do some guessing, but I was talking before about doing some model modeling of arti uh, uh, marking of articulatory, features, with overlap and so on. Grad F: Hmm. Professor C: And, and, um, On some subset. One thought might be to do this uh, on {disfmarker} on the digits, or some piece of the digits. Uh, it'd be easier, uh, and so forth. The only thing is I'm a little concerned that maybe the kind of phenomena, in w i i The reason for doing it is because the {disfmarker} the argument is that certainly with conversational speech, the stuff that we've looked at here before, um, just doing the simple mapping, from, um, the phone, to the corresponding features that you could look up in a book, uh, isn't right. It isn't actually right. In fact there's these overlapping processes where some voicing some up and then some, you know, some nasality is {disfmarker} comes in here, and so forth. And you do this gross thing saying" Well I guess it's this phone starting there" . So, uh, that's the reasoning. But, It could be that when we're reading digits, because it's {disfmarker} it's for such a limited set, that maybe {disfmarker} maybe that phenomenon doesn't occur as much. I don't know. Di - an anybody {disfmarker}? {pause} Do you have any {disfmarker}? {pause} Anybody have any opinion about that, Postdoc B: and that people might articulate more, and you that might end up with more {disfmarker} a closer correspondence. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad F: Yeah {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I agree. PhD D: Sort of less predictability, Grad F: That {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: and {disfmarker} You hafta {disfmarker} Grad F: It's a {disfmarker} Well {disfmarker} Would, this corpus really be the right one to even try that on? PhD G: Well it's definitely true that, when people are, reading, even if they're re - reading what, they had said spontaneously, that they have very different patterns. Mitch showed that, and some, dissertations have shown that. Professor C: Right. PhD G: So the fact that they're reading, first of all, whether they're reading in a room of, people, or rea you know, just the fact that they're reading will make a difference. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: And, depends what you're interested in. Professor C: See, I don't know. So, may maybe the thing will be do {disfmarker} to take some very small subset, I mean not have a big, program, but take a small set, uh, subset of the conversational speech and a small subset of the digits, and {pause} look and {disfmarker} and just get a feeling for it. Um, just take a look. Really. Postdoc B: H That could {disfmarker} could be an interesting design, too, cuz then you'd have the com the comparison of the, uh, predictable speech versus the less predictable speech Professor C: Cuz I don't think anybody is, I at least, I don't know, of anybody, uh, well, I don't know, {vocalsound} the answers. PhD D: Hey. Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: and maybe you'd find that it worked in, in the, case of the pr of the, uh, non - predictable. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: Hafta think about, the particular acoustic features to mark, too, because, I mean, some things, they wouldn't be able to mark, like, uh, you know, uh, tense lax. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Some things are really difficult. You know, Postdoc B: Well. PhD D: just listening. Grad F: M I think we can get Ohala in to, give us some advice on that. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: Also I thought you were thinking of a much more restricted set of features, that {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah, but I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was, like he said, {vocalsound} I was gonna bring John in and ask John what he thought. Postdoc B: Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. Professor C: Right. But I mean you want {disfmarker} you want it be restrictive but you also want it to {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} to have coverage. Grad F: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah Professor C: You know i you should. It should be such that if you, if you, uh, if you had o um, all of the features, determined that you {disfmarker} that you were uh ch have chosen, that that would tell you, uh, in the steady - state case, uh, the phone. So, um. Postdoc B: OK. Grad F: Even, I guess with vowels that would be pretty hard, wouldn't it? To identify actually, you know, which one it is? Postdoc B: It would seem to me that the points of articulation would be m more, g uh, I mean that's {disfmarker} I think about articulatory features, I think about, points of articulation, which means, uh, rather than vowels. Grad F: Yeah. PhD D: Points of articulation? What do you mean? Postdoc B: So, is it, uh, bilabial or dental or is it, you know, palatal. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: Which {disfmarker} which are all like where {disfmarker} where your tongue comes to rest. Professor C: Place, place. PhD D: Place of ar place of articulation. Grad F: Uvular. PhD A: Place. Postdoc B: Place. Thank you, what {disfmarker} whatev whatever I s said, that's {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK. Postdoc B: I really meant place. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK, I see. Professor C: Yeah. OK we got our jargon then, OK. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh. PhD G: Well it's also, there's, really a difference between, the pronunciation models in the dictionary, and, the pronunciations that people produce. And, so, You get, some of that information from Steve's work on the {disfmarker} on the labeling Professor C: Right. Grad F: Right. PhD G: and it really, I actually think that data should be used more. That maybe, although I think the meeting context is great, that he has transcriptions that give you the actual phone sequence. And you can go from {disfmarker} not from that to the articulatory features, but that would be a better starting point for marking, the gestural features, then, data where you don't have that, because, we {disfmarker} you wanna know, both about the way that they're producing a certain sound, and what kinds of, you know what kinds of, phonemic, differences you get between these, transcribed, sequences and the dictionary ones. Professor C: Well you might be right that mi might be the way at getting at, what I was talking about, but the particular reason why I was interested in doing that was because I remember, when that happened, and, John Ohala was over here and he was looking at the spectrograms of the more difficult ones. Uh, he didn't know what to say, about, what is the sequence of phones there. They came up with some compromise. Because that really wasn't what it look like. It didn't look like a sequence of phones Grad F: Right. PhD G: Right. Professor C: it look like this blending thing happening here and here and here. Grad F: Yeah, so you have this feature here, and, overlap, yeah. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: There was no name for that. PhD G: But {disfmarker} Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: But it still is {disfmarker} there's a {disfmarker} there are two steps. One {disfmarker} you know, one is going from a dictionary pronunciation of something, like," gonna see you tomorrow" , Grad F: And {disfmarker} Or" gonta" . Professor C: Right. Yeah. PhD G: it could be" going to" or" gonna" or" gonta s" you know. Professor C: Right. PhD G: And, yeah." Gonna see you tomorrow" , uh," guh see you tomorrow" . And, that it would be nice to have these, intermediate, or these {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} these reduced pronunciations that those transcribers had marked or to have people mark those as well. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Because, it's not, um, that easy to go from the, dictionary, word pronuncia the dictionary phone pronunciation, to the gestural one without this intermediate or a syllable level kind of, representation. Grad F: Well I don't think Morgan's suggesting that we do that, though. Professor C: Do you mean, PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Yeah, I mean, I I I'm jus at the moment of course we're just talking about what, to provide as a tool for people to do research who have different ideas about how to do it. So for instance, you might have someone who just has a wor has words with states, and has uh {disfmarker} uh, comes from articulatory gestures to that. And someone else, might actually want some phonetic uh intermediate thing. So I think it would be {disfmarker} be best to have all of it if we could. But {pause} um, Grad F: But {disfmarker} What I'm imagining is a score - like notation, where each line is a particular feature. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Right, Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: so you would say, you know, it's voiced through here, and so you have label here, and you have nas nasal here, and, they {disfmarker} they could be overlapping in all sorts of bizarre ways that don't correspond to the timing on phones. Professor C: I mean this is the kind of reason why {disfmarker} I remember when at one of the Switchboard, workshops, that uh when we talked about doing the transcription project, Dave Talkin said," can't be done" . Grad F: Right. Professor C: He was {disfmarker} he was, what {disfmarker} what he meant was that this isn't, you know, a sequence of phones, and when you actually look at Switchboard that's, not what you see, and, you know. And. It, Grad F: And in {disfmarker} in fact the inter - annotator agreement was not that good, right? On the harder ones? Professor C: yeah I mean it was PhD G: It depends how you look at it, and I {disfmarker} I understand what you're saying about this, kind of transcription exactly, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: because I've seen {disfmarker} you know, where does the voicing bar start and so forth. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: All I'm saying is that, it is useful to have that {disfmarker} the transcription of what was really said, and which syllables were reduced. Uh, if you're gonna add the features it's also useful to have some level of representation which is, is a reduced {disfmarker} it's a pronunciation variant, that currently the dictionaries don't give you Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: because if you add them to the dictionary and you run recognition, you, you add confusion. Professor C: Right. Right. PhD G: So people purposely don't add them. So it's useful to know which variant was {disfmarker} was produced, at least at the phone level. PhD D: So it would be {disfmarker} it would be great if we had, either these kind of, labelings on, the same portion of Switchboard that Steve marked, or, Steve's type markings on this data, with these. PhD G: Right. That's all, I mean. Exactly. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Exactly. Professor C: Yeah, no I {disfmarker} I don't disagree with that. PhD G: And Steve's type is fairly {disfmarker} it's not that slow, uh, uh, I dunno exactly what the, timing was, but. Professor C: Yeah u I don't disagree with it the on the only thing is that, What you actually will end {disfmarker} en end up with is something, i it's all compromised, right, so, the string that you end up with isn't, actually, what happened. But it's {disfmarker} it's the best compromise that a group of people scratching their heads could come up with to describe what happened. PhD D: And it's more accurate than, phone labels. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: But. And it's more accurate than the {disfmarker} than the dictionary or, if you've got a pronunciation uh lexicon that has three or four, Grad F: The word. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: this might be have been the fifth one that you tr that you pruned or whatever, PhD D: So it's like a continuum. PhD G: Right. Professor C: so sure. PhD D: It's {disfmarker} you're going all the way down, PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: yeah. PhD G: That's what I meant is {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: an and in some places it would fill in, So {disfmarker} the kinds of gestural features are not everywhere. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} PhD D: Right. PhD G: So there are some things that you don't have access to either from your ear or the spectrogram, PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD G: but you know what phone it was and that's about all you can {disfmarker} all you can say. PhD D: Right. PhD G: And then there are other cases where, nasality, voicing {disfmarker} PhD D: It's basically just having, multiple levels of {disfmarker} of, information and marking, on the signal. PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Well the other difference is that the {disfmarker} the features, are not synchronous, PhD G: Right. Grad F: right. They overlap each other in weird ways. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. Grad F: So it's not a strictly one - dimensional signal. Professor C: Right. Grad F: So I think that's sorta qualitatively different. PhD G: Right. You can add the features in, uh, but it'll be underspecified. Postdoc B: Hmm. PhD G: Th - there'll be no way for you to actually mark what was said completely by features. Grad F: Well not with our current system but you could imagine designing a system, that the states were features, rather than phones. PhD G: And i if you're {disfmarker} Well, we {disfmarker} we've probably have a {vocalsound} separate, um, discussion of, uh {disfmarker} of whether you can do that. Postdoc B: That's {disfmarker} Well, {pause} isn't that {disfmarker} I thought that was, well but that {disfmarker} wasn't that kinda the direction? Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc B: I thought Professor C: Yeah, so I mean, what, what {disfmarker} where this is, I mean, I I want would like to have something that's useful to people other than those who are doing the specific kind of research I have in mind, so it should be something broader. But, The {disfmarker} but uh where I'm coming from is, uh, we're coming off of stuff that Larry Saul did with {disfmarker} with, um, uh, John Dalan and Muzim Rahim in which, uh, they, uh, have, um, a m a multi - band system that is, uh, trained through a combination of gradient learning an and EM, to {pause} um, estimate, uh, {vocalsound} the, uh, value for m for {disfmarker} for a particular feature. OK. And this is part of a larger, image that John Dalan has about how the human brain does it in which he's sort of imagining that, individual frequency channels are coming up with their own estimate, of {disfmarker} of these, these kinds of {disfmarker} something like this. Might not be, you know, exact features that, Jakobson thought of or something. But I mean you know some, something like that. Some kind of low - level features, which are not, fully, you know, phone classification. And the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} th this particular image, of how thi how it's done, is that, then given all of these estimates at that level, there's a level above it, then which is {disfmarker} is making, some kind of sound unit classification such as, you know, phone and {disfmarker} and, you know. You could argue what, what a sound unit should be, and {disfmarker} and so forth. But that {disfmarker} that's sort of what I was imagining doing, um, and {disfmarker} but it's still open within that whether you would have an intermediate level in which it was actually phones, or not. You wouldn't necessarily have to. Um, but, Again, I wouldn't wanna, wouldn't want what we {disfmarker} we produced to be so, know, local in perspective that it {disfmarker} it was matched, what we were thinking of doing one week, And {disfmarker} and, and, you know, what you're saying is absolutely right. That, that if we, can we should put in, uh, another level of, of description there if we're gonna get into some of this low - level stuff. PhD D: Well, you know, um {disfmarker} I mean if we're talking about, having the, annotators annotate these kinds of features, it seems like, You know, you {disfmarker} The {disfmarker} the question is, do they do that on, meeting data? Or do they do that on, Switchboard? Grad F: That's what I was saying, Postdoc B: W Well it seems like you could do both. Grad F: maybe meeting data isn't the right corpus. Postdoc B: I mean, I was thinking that it would be interesting, to do it with respect to, parts of Switchboard anyway, in terms of, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} partly to see, if you could, generate first guesses at what the articulatory feature would be, based on the phone representation at that lower level. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: It might be a time gain. But also in terms of comparability of, um, Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Well cuz the yeah, and then also, if you did it on Switchboard, you would have, the full continuum of transcriptions. Postdoc B: what you gain Yep. PhD D: You'd have it, from the lowest level, the ac acoustic features, then you'd have the, you know, the phonetic level that Steve did, Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Yeah that {disfmarker} that's all I was thinking about. Postdoc B: And you could tell that {disfmarker} PhD D: and, yeah. PhD G: it is telephone band, so, the bandwidth might be {disfmarker} PhD D: It'd be a complete, set then. Postdoc B: And you get the relative gain up ahead. Professor C: It's so it's a little different. So I mean i we'll see wha how much we can, uh, get the people to do, and how much money we'll have and all this sort of thing, PhD G: Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD D: But it {disfmarker} it might be good to do what Jane was saying uh, you know, seed it, with, guesses about what we think the features are, based on, you know, the phone or Steve's transcriptions or something. to make it quicker. Professor C: but, Might be do both. Grad F: Alright, so based on the phone transcripts they would all be synchronous, but then you could imagine, nudging them here and there. PhD D: Adjusting? Yeah, exactly. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD D: Scoot the voicing over a little, because {disfmarker} Grad F: Right. Professor C: Well I think what {disfmarker} I mean I'm {disfmarker} I'm a l little behind in what they're doing, now, and, uh, the stuff they're doing on Switchboard now. But I think that, Steve and the gang are doing, something with an automatic system first and then doing some adjustment. As I re as I recall. So I mean that's probably the right way to go anyway, is to {disfmarker} is to start off with an automatic system with a pretty rich pronunciation dictionary that, that, um, you know, tries, to label it all. And then, people go through and fix it. Postdoc B: So in {disfmarker} in our case you'd think about us s starting with maybe the regular dictionary entry, and then? Or {pause} would we {disfmarker} Professor C: Well, regular dictionary, I mean, this is a pretty rich dictionary. It's got, got a fair number of pronunciations in it Postdoc B: But {disfmarker} PhD D: Or you could start from the {disfmarker} if we were gonna, do the same set, of sentences that Steve had, done, we could start with those transcriptions. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. So I was thinking {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: That's actually what I was thinking, is tha {disfmarker} PhD D: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: the problem is when you run, uh, if you run a regular dictionary, um, even if you have variants, in there, which most people don't, you don't always get, out, the actual pronunciations, PhD D: Yeah. PhD G: so that's why the human transcriber's giving you the {disfmarker} that pronunciation, Postdoc B: Yeah. Oh. Professor C: Actually maybe they're using phone recognizers. PhD G: and so y they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} I thought that they were {disfmarker} Professor C: Is that what they're doing? Grad F: They are. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: we should catch up on what Steve is, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: uh {disfmarker} I think that would be a good i good idea. Professor C: Yeah, so I think that i i we also don't have, I mean, we've got a good start on it, but we don't have a really good, meeting, recorder or recognizer or transcriber or anything yet, so. So, I mean another way to look at this is to, is to, uh, do some stuff on Switchboard which has all this other, stuff to it. PhD G: Yeah. Professor C: And then, um, As we get, further down the road and we can do more things ahead of time, we can, do some of the same things to the meeting data. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: And I'm {disfmarker} and these people might {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they are, s most of them are trained with IPA. Professor C: Yeah Postdoc B: They'd be able to do phonetic - level coding, or articulatory. PhD D: Are they busy for the next couple years, or {disfmarker}? Postdoc B: Well, you know, I mean they, they {disfmarker} they're interested in continuing working with us, so {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} I, and this would be up their alley, so, we could {disfmarker} when the {disfmarker} when you d meet with, with John Ohala and find, you know what taxonomy you want to apply, then, they'd be, good to train onto it. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, this is, not an urgent thing at all, Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: just it came up. PhD D: It'd be very interesting though, to have {pause} that data. Postdoc B: I think so, too. Grad F: I wonder, how would you do a forced alignment? PhD G: Yeah. Might {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Interesting idea. Grad F: To {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} I mean, you'd wanna iterate, somehow. Yeah. It's interesting thing to think about. PhD D: Hmm. PhD G: It might be {disfmarker} Grad F: I mean you'd {disfmarker} you'd want models for spreading. PhD G: I was thinking it might be n PhD D: Of the f acoustic features? Grad F: Yeah. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Well it might be neat to do some, phonetic, features on these, nonword words. Are {disfmarker} are these kinds of words that people never {disfmarker} the" huh" s and the" hmm" s and the" huh" {vocalsound} and the uh {disfmarker} These k No, I'm serious. There are all these kinds of {pause} functional, uh, elements. I don't know what you call {pause} them. But not just fill pauses but all kinds of ways of {pause} interrupting {comment} and so forth. Grad F: Uh - huh. PhD G: And some of them are, {vocalsound} yeah," uh - huh" s, and" hmm" s, and," hmm!" " hmm" {comment}" OK" ," uh" {comment} Grunts, uh, that might be interesting. Postdoc B: He's got lip {disfmarker} {pause} lipsmacks. PhD G: In the meetings. Professor C: We should move on. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh, new version of, uh, presegmentation? PhD A: Uh, oh yeah, um, {vocalsound} I worked a little bit on the {disfmarker} on the presegmentation to {disfmarker} to get another version which does channel - specific, uh, speech - nonspeech detection. And, what I did is I used some normalized features which, uh, look in into the {disfmarker} which is normalized energy, uh, energy normalized by the mean over the channels and by the, minimum over the, other. within each channel. And to {disfmarker} to, mm, to, yeah, to normalize also loudness and {disfmarker} and modified loudness and things and that those special features actually are in my feature vector. Grad F: Oh. PhD A: And, and, therefore to be able to, uh, somewhat distinguish between foreground and background speech in {disfmarker} in the different {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} each channel. And, eh, I tested it on {disfmarker} on three or four meetings and it seems to work, well yeah, fairly well, I {disfmarker} I would say. There are some problems with the lapel mike. Grad F: Of course. PhD A: Yeah. Uh, yeah. Grad F: Wow that's great. PhD A: And. Grad F: So I {disfmarker} I understand that's what you were saying about your problem with, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. And. Yeah, and {disfmarker} and I had {disfmarker} I had, uh, specific problems with. Grad F: I get it. So new use ninetieth quartile, rather than, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: Wow. PhD A: Yeah {disfmarker} yeah, then {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I did some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} some things like that, Postdoc B: Interesting. PhD A: as there {disfmarker} there are some {disfmarker} some problems in, when, in the channel, there {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} the the speaker doesn't {disfmarker} doesn't talk much or doesn't talk at all. Then, the, yeah, there are {disfmarker} there are some problems with {disfmarker} with {disfmarker} with n with normalization, and, then, uh, there the system doesn't work at all. So, I'm {disfmarker} I'm glad that there is the {disfmarker} the digit part, where everybody is forced to say something, Professor C: Right. PhD A: so, that's {disfmarker} that's great for {disfmarker} for my purpose. And, the thing is I {disfmarker} I, then the evaluation of {disfmarker} of the system is a little bit hard, as I don't have any references. Grad F: Well we did the hand {disfmarker} the one by hand. PhD A: Yeah, that's the one {disfmarker} one wh where I do the training on so I can't do the evaluation on So the thing is, can the transcribers perhaps do some, some {disfmarker} some meetings in {disfmarker} in terms of speech - nonspeech in {disfmarker} in the specific channels? Grad F: Uh. Postdoc B: Well, I have {disfmarker} PhD D: Well won't you have that from their transcriptions? Postdoc B: Well, OK, so, now we need {disfmarker} Grad F: No, cuz we need is really tight. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: so, um, I think I might have done what you're requesting, though I did it in the service of a different thing. PhD A: Oh, great. Postdoc B: I have thirty minutes that I've more tightly transcribed with reference to individual channels. PhD A: OK. OK, that's great. That's great for me. Yeah, so. Postdoc B: And I could {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} Grad F: Hopefully that's not the same meeting that we did. Postdoc B: No, actually it's a different meeting. Grad F: Good. PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: So, um, e so the, you know, we have the, th they transcribe as if it's one channel with these {disfmarker} with the slashes to separate the overlapping parts. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then we run it through {disfmarker} then it {disfmarker} then I'm gonna edit it and I'm gonna run it through channelize which takes it into Dave Gelbart's form format. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then you have, all these things split across according to channel, and then that means that, if a person contributed more than once in a given, overlap during that time bend that {disfmarker} that two parts of the utterance end up together, it's the same channel, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and then I took his tool, and last night for the first thirty minutes of one of these transcripts, I, tightened up the, um, boundaries on individual speakers'channels, PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: cuz his {disfmarker} his interface allows me to have total flexibility in the time tags across the channels. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And {pause} um, so. PhD A: so, yeah {disfmarker} yeah, that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that's great, but what would be nice to have some more meetings, not just one meeting to {disfmarker} to be sure that {disfmarker} that, there is a system, PhD D: So, current {disfmarker} This week. Postdoc B: Yes. Might not be what you need. Grad F: Yeah, so if we could get a couple meetings done with that level of precision I think that would be a good idea. PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: Oh, OK. Uh, how {disfmarker} how m much time {disfmarker} so the meetings vary in length, what are we talking about in terms of the number of minutes you'd like to have as your {disfmarker} as your training set? PhD A: It seems to me that it would be good to have, a few minutes from {disfmarker} from different meetings, so. But I'm not sure about how much. Postdoc B: OK, now you're saying different meetings because of different speakers or because of different audio quality or both or {disfmarker}? PhD A: Both {disfmarker} both. Different {disfmarker} different number of speakers, different speakers, different {pause} conditions. Postdoc B: OK. Professor C: Yeah, we don't have that much variety in meetings yet, uh, I mean we have this meeting and the feature meeting and we have a couple others that we have uh, couple examples of. But {disfmarker} but, uh, PhD A: Yeah, m Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Grad E: Even probably with the gains {pause} differently will affect it, you mean {disfmarker} PhD A: Uh, not really as {disfmarker} Professor C: Poten - potentially. PhD A: uh, because of the normalization, yeah. Grad E: Oh, cuz you use the normalization? OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: We can try running {disfmarker} we haven't done this yet because, um, uh, Andreas an is {disfmarker} is gonna move over the SRI recognizer. i basically I ran out of machines at SRI, PhD A: OK. PhD G: cuz we're running the evals and I just don't have machine time there. But, once that's moved over, uh, hopefully in a {disfmarker} a couple days, then, we can take, um, what Jane just told us about as, the presegmented, {vocalsound} {nonvocalsound} the {disfmarker} the segmentations that you did, at level eight or som {comment} at some, threshold that Jane, tha {pause} right, and try doing, forced alignment. um, on the word strings. Grad F: Oh, shoot! PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: The pre presegment PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: yeah. PhD A: With the recognizer? Yeah. PhD G: And if it's good, then that will {disfmarker} that may give you a good boundary. Of course if it's good, we don't {disfmarker} then we're {disfmarker} we're fine, PhD A: Yeah. M PhD G: but, I don't know yet whether these, segments that contain a lot of pauses around the words, will work or not. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I would quite like to have some manually transcribed references for {disfmarker} for the system, as I'm not sure if {disfmarker} if it's really good to compare with {disfmarker} with some other automatic, found boundaries. PhD G: Yeah. Right. Postdoc B: Well, no, if we were to start with this and then tweak it h manually, would that {disfmarker} that would be OK? PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah {pause} sure. PhD G: They might be OK. Postdoc B: OK. PhD G: It {disfmarker} you know it really depends on a lot of things, PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: but, I would have maybe a transciber, uh, look at the result of a forced alignment and then adjust those. PhD A: Yeah. To a adjust them, or, yeah. Yeah, yeah. PhD G: That might save some time. PhD A: Yeah, great. PhD G: If they're horrible it won't help at all, but they might not be horrible. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: So {disfmarker} but I'll let you know when we, uh, have that. PhD A: OK, great. Postdoc B: How many minutes would you want from {disfmarker} I mean, we could {pause} easily, get a section, you know, like say a minute or so, from every meeting that we have so f from the newer ones that we're working on, everyone that we have. And then, should provide this. PhD A: If it's not the first minute of {disfmarker} of the meeting, that {disfmarker} that's OK with me, but, in {disfmarker} in the first minute, uh, Often there are some {disfmarker} some strange things going on which {disfmarker} which aren't really, well, for, which {disfmarker} which aren't re re really good. So. What {disfmarker} what I'd quite like, perhaps, is, to have, some five minutes of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of different meetings, so. Postdoc B: Somewhere not in the very beginning, five minutes, OK. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And, then I wanted to ask you just for my inter information, then, would you, be trai cuz I don't quite unders so, would you be training then, um, the segmenter so that, it could, on the basis of that, segment the rest of the meeting? So, if I give you like {pause} five minutes is the idea that this would then be applied to, uh, to, providing tighter time {pause} bands? PhD A: I {disfmarker} I could do a {disfmarker} a retraining with that, yeah. Postdoc B: Wow, interesting. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but I hope that I {disfmarker} I don't need to do it. Postdoc B: OK. PhD A: So, uh it c can be do in an unsupervised way. Postdoc B: Uh - huh. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Excellent. Excellent, OK. PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, but, for {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} for those three meetings whi which I {disfmarker} which I did, it seems to be, quite well, but, there are some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} as I said some problems with the lapel mike, but, perhaps we can do something with {disfmarker} with cross - correlations to, to get rid of the {disfmarker} of those. And. Yeah. That's {disfmarker} that's what I {disfmarker} that's my {pause} future work. Well {disfmarker} well what I want to do is to {disfmarker} to look into cross - correlations for {disfmarker} for removing those, false overlaps. Postdoc B: Wonderful. PhD G: Are the, um, wireless, different than the wired, mikes, at all? I mean, have you noticed any difference? PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, um, if {disfmarker} if there are any wired mikes in those meetings, or, uh, I have {disfmarker} have to loo have a look at them but, I'm {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} I think there's no difference between, PhD G: So it's just the lapel versus everything else? PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so then, if that's five minutes per meeting we've got like twelve minutes, twelve meetings, roughly, that I'm {disfmarker} that I've been working with, then {disfmarker} Professor C: Of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of the meetings that you're working with, how many of them are different, tha PhD A: No. Professor C: are there any of them that are different than, these two meetings? Postdoc B: Well {disfmarker} oh wa in terms of the speakers or the conditions or the? Professor C: Yeah, speakers. Sorry. PhD A: Yeah, that {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Um, we have different combinations of speakers. Professor C: So. Postdoc B: I mean, just from what I've seen, uh, there are some where, um, you're present or not present, and, then {disfmarker} then you have the difference between the networks group and this group PhD A: Yeah, I know, some of the NSA meetings, yeah. Professor C: Yeah. So I didn't know in the group you had if you had {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: so you have the networks meeting? PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yep, we do. Professor C: Do you have any of Jerry's meetings in your, pack, er, Postdoc B: Um, no. Professor C: No? Postdoc B: We could, I mean you {disfmarker} you recorded one last week or so. I could get that new one in this week {disfmarker} I get that new one in. Grad F: Yep. u PhD G: We're gonna be recording them every {pause} Monday, Professor C: Yeah. Cuz I think he really needs variety, PhD G: so {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Great. Professor C: and {disfmarker} and having as much variety for speaker certainly would be a big part of that I think. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so if I, OK, included {disfmarker} include, OK, then, uh, if I were to include all together samples from twelve meetings that would only take an hour and I could get the transcribers to do that right {disfmarker} I mean, what I mean is, that would be an hour sampled, and then they'd transcribe those {disfmarker} that hour, right? That's what I should do? Professor C: Yeah. And. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} that's. Postdoc B: I don't mean transcribe Professor C: Right. Ye - But you're {disfmarker} y Postdoc B: I mean {disfmarker} I mean adjust. So they get it into the multi - channel format and then adjust the timebands so it's precise. Professor C: So that should be faster than the ten times kind of thing, Postdoc B: Absolutely. I did {disfmarker} I did, um, uh, so, last night I did, uh, Professor C: yeah. Postdoc B: Oh gosh, well, last night, I did about half an hour in, three hours, which is not, terrific, Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: but, um, anyway, it's an hour and a half per {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. Well, that's probably. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Well, I can't calculate on my, {vocalsound} on my feet. PhD A: Do the transcribers actually start wi with, uh, transcribing new meetings, or {pause} are they? Postdoc B: Well, um they're still working {disfmarker} they still have enough to finish that I haven't assigned a new meeting, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: but the next, m m I was about to need to assign a new meeting and I was going to take it from one of the new ones, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and I could easily give them Jerry Feldman's meeting, no problem. And, then {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD G: So they're really running out of, data, prett I mean that's good. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Uh, that first set. PhD G: Um, OK. Professor C: They're running out of data unless we s make the decision that we should go over and start, uh, transcribing the other set. PhD G: So {disfmarker} Professor C: There {disfmarker} the first {disfmarker} the first half. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And so I was in the process of like editing them but this is wonderful news. PhD A: OK. Professor C: Alright. Postdoc B: We funded the experiment with, uh {disfmarker} also we were thinking maybe applying that that to getting the, Yeah, that'll be, very useful to getting the overlaps to be more precise all the way through. Professor C: So this, blends nicely into the update on transcripts. Postdoc B: Yes, it does. So, um, {comment} um, Liz, and {disfmarker} and Don, and I met this morning, in the BARCO room, with the lecture hall, Professor C: OK. PhD G: Yeah, please. Go ahead. And this afternoon. Postdoc B: and this afternoon, it drifted into the afternoon, {comment} {vocalsound} uh, concerning this issue of, um, the, well there's basically the issue of the interplay between the transcript format and the processing that, they need to do for, the SRI recognizer. And, um, well, so, I mentioned the process that I'm going through with the data, so, you know, I get the data back from the transcri Well, s uh, metaphorically, get the data back from the transcriber, and then I, check for simple things like spelling errors and things like that. And, um, I'm going to be doing a more thorough editing, with respect to consistency of the conventions. But they're {disfmarker} they're generally very good. And, then, I run it through, uh, the channelize program to get it into the multi - channel format, OK. And {pause} the, what we discussed this morning, I would summarize as saying that, um, these units that result, in a {disfmarker} a particular channel and a particular timeband, at {disfmarker} at that level, um, vary in length. And, um, {nonvocalsound} their recognizer would prefer that the units not be overly long. But it's really an empirical question, whether the units we get at this point through, just that process I described might be sufficient for them. So, as a first pass through, a first chance without having to do a lot of hand - editing, what we're gonna do, is, I'll run it through channelize, give them those data after I've done the editing process and be sure it's clean. And I can do that, pretty quickly, with just, that minimal editing, without having to hand - break things. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: And then we'll see if the units that we're getting, uh, with the {disfmarker} at that level, are sufficient. And maybe they don't need to be further broken down. And if they do need to be further broken down then maybe it just be piece - wise, maybe it won't be the whole thing. So, that's {disfmarker} that's what we were discussing, this morning as far as I {disfmarker} Among {disfmarker} PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: also we discussed some adaptational things, PhD G: Then lots of {disfmarker} Postdoc B: so it's like, PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} You know I hadn't, uh, incorporated, a convention explicitly to handle acronyms, for example, but if someone says, PZM it would be nice to have that be directly interpretable from, the transcript what they said, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: or Pi - uh Tcl {disfmarker} TCL I mean. It's like y it's {disfmarker} and so, um, I've {disfmarker} I've incorporated also convention, with that but that's easy to handle at the post editing phase, and I'll mention it to, transcribers for the next phase but that's OK. And then, a similar conv uh, convention for numbers. So if they say one - eighty - three versus one eight three. Um, and also I'll be, um, encoding, as I do my post - editing, the, things that are in curly brackets, which are clarificational material. And eh to incorporate, uh, keyword, at the beginning. So, it's gonna be either a gloss or it's gonna be a vocal sound like a, laugh or a cough, or, so forth. Or a non - vocal sound like a doors door - slam, and that can be easily done with a, you know, just a {disfmarker} one little additional thing in the, in the general format. PhD G: Yeah we j we just needed a way to, strip, you know, all the comments, all the things th the {disfmarker} that linguist wants but the recognizer can't do anything with. Um, but to keep things that we mapped to like reject models, or, you know, uh, mouth noise, or, cough. And then there's this interesting issue Jane brought up which I hadn't thought about before but I was, realizing as I went through the transcripts, that there are some noises like, um, well the {disfmarker} good example was an inbreath, where a transcriber working from, the mixed, signal, doesn't know whose breath it is, Grad F: Right. PhD G: and they've been assigning it to someone that may or may not be correct. And what we do is, if it's a breath sound, you know, a sound from the speaker, we map it, to, a noise model, like a mouth - noise model in the recognizer, and, yeah, it probably doesn't hurt that much once in a while to have these, but, if they're in the wrong channel, that's, not a good idea. And then there's also, things like door - slams that's really in no one's channel, they're like {disfmarker} it's in the room. PhD A: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: And {pause} uh, Jane had this nice, uh, idea of having, like an extra, uh couple tiers, Grad F: An extra channel. Postdoc B: Yeah. I've been {disfmarker} I've been adding that to the ones I've been editing. PhD G: yeah. And we were thinking, that is useful also when there's uncertainties. So if they hear a breath and they don't know who breath it is it's better to put it in that channel than to put it in the speaker's channel because maybe it was someone else's breath, or {disfmarker} Uh, so I think that's a good {disfmarker} you can always clean that up, post - processing. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So a lot of little details, but I think we're, coming to some kinda closure, on that. So the idea is then, uh, Don can take, uh, Jane's post - processed channelized version, and, with some scripts, you know, convert that to {disfmarker} to a reference for the recognizer and we can, can run these. So {pause} when that's, ready {disfmarker} you know, as soon as that's ready, and as soon as the recognizer is here we can get, twelve hours of force - aligned and recognized data. And, you know, start, working on it, Postdoc B: And {disfmarker} PhD G: so we're, I dunno a coup a week or two away I would say from, uh, if {disfmarker} if that process is automatic once we get your post - process, transcript. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. And that doesn't {disfmarker} the amount of editing that it would require is not very much either. I'm just hoping that the units that are provided in that way, {nonvocalsound} will be sufficient cuz I would save a lot of, uh, time, dividing things. PhD G: Yeah, some of them are quite long. Just from {disfmarker} I dunno how long were {disfmarker} you did one? Grad E: I saw a couple, {vocalsound} around twenty seconds, and that was just without looking too hard for it, so, I would imagine that there might be some that are longer. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Well n One question, e w would that be a single speaker or is that multiple speakers overlapping? Grad E: No. No, but if we're gonna segment it, like if there's one speaker in there, that says" OK" or something, right in the middle, it's gonna have a lot of dead time around it, PhD G: Right. It's not the {disfmarker} it's not the fact that we can't process a twenty second segment, it's the fact that, there's twenty seconds in which to place one word in the wrong place Grad E: so it's not {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Yeah. Grad E: Yeah. PhD G: You know, if {disfmarker} if someone has a very short utterance there, and that's where, we, might wanna have this individual, you know, ha have your pre pre - process input. PhD A: Yep. Yeah. Sure. Postdoc B: That's very important. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I thought that perhaps the transcribers could start then from the {disfmarker} those mult multi - channel, uh, speech - nonspeech detections, if they would like to. PhD G: And I just don't know, I have to run it. Postdoc B: In {disfmarker} in doing the hand - marking? PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yeah that's what I was thinking, too. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So that's probably what will happen, but we'll try it this way and see. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: I mean it's probably good enough for force - alignment. If it's not then we're really {disfmarker} then we def definitely PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: uh, but for free recognition I'm {disfmarker} it'll probably not be good enough. We'll probably get lots of errors because of the cross - talk, and, noises and things. PhD A: Yep. Professor C: Good s I think that's probably our agenda, or starting up there. Postdoc B: Oh I wanted to ask one thing, the microphones {disfmarker} the new microphones, Professor C: Yeah? K. Postdoc B: when do we get, uh? Grad F: Uh, they said it would take about a week. Postdoc B: Oh, exciting. K. K. Professor C: K. PhD D: You ordered them already? Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Great. PhD G: So what happens to our old microphones? Professor C: They go where old microphones go. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} PhD G: Do we give them to someone, or {disfmarker}? Grad F: Well the only thing we're gonna have extra, for now, PhD G: We don't have more receivers, we just have {disfmarker} Grad F: Right, we don so the only thing we'll have extra now is just the lapel. PhD G: Right. Grad F: Not {disfmarker} not the, bodypack, just the lapel. PhD G: Just the lapel itself. Grad F: Um, and then one of the {disfmarker} one of those. Since, what I decided to do, on Morgan's suggestion, was just get two, new microphones, um, and try them out. And then, if we like them we'll get more. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: OK. Grad F: Since they're {disfmarker} they're like two hundred bucks a piece, we won't, uh, at least try them out. PhD D: So it's a replacement for this headset mike? Grad F: Yep. Yep. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And they're gonna do the wiring for us. PhD D: What's the, um, style of the headset? Grad F: It's, um, it's by Crown, and it's one of these sort of mount around the ear thingies, and, uh, when I s when I mentioned that we thought it was uncomfortable he said it was a common problem with the Sony. And this is how apparently a lot of people are getting around it. PhD D: Hmm. Grad F: And I checked on the web, and every site I went to, raved about this particular mike. It's apparently comfortable and stays on the head well, so we'll see if it's any good. But, uh, I think it's promising. Postdoc B: You said it was used by aerobics instructors? Grad F: Yep. Yep, so it was {disfmarker} it was advertised for performers Postdoc B: That says a lot. Grad E: Hmm. Professor C: For the recor for the record Adam is not a paid employee or a consultant of Crown. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Excuse me? Postdoc B: Oh. Professor C: I said" For the record Adam is {disfmarker} is not a paid consultant or employee of Crown" . Grad F: Excuse me? PhD G: Right. Grad F: That's right. PhD G: However, he may be solicited after these meetings are distributed. Grad F: Well we're using the Crown P Z Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Don't worry about finishing your dissertation. Grad F: These are Crown aren't they? Professor C: Right. Grad F: The P Z Ms are Crown, aren't they? Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah, I thought they were. Professor C: You bet. You bet. Grad F: And they work very well. PhD G: Yes. Professor C: So if we go to a workshop about all this {disfmarker} this it's gonna be a meeting about meetings about meetings. OK. So. Grad F: And then it {disfmarker} we have to go to the planning session for that workshop. Professor C: Oh, yeah, what {disfmarker} Which'll be the meeting about the meeting about the meeting. PhD D: Oh, god. Grad F: Cuz then it would be a meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meetings. Postdoc B: Professor C: Yeah? Just start saying" M four" . Yeah, OK. Grad F: Yeah. M to the fourth. Professor C: Should we do the digits? Grad F: Yep, go for it. Professor C: OK. PhD A: S {pause} s Grad F: Pause between the lines, remember? Grad E: Excuse me. Grad F: OK. Professor C: OK. PhD G: Huh.

The group also considered the prospect of performing fine-grained acoustic-phonetic analyses on a subset of Meeting Recorder digits or Switchboard data. Pre-segmentation manipulations that allow for the segmentation of channel-specific speech/non-speech portions of the signal and the distinction of foreground versus background speech were discussed.

tr-sq-92

tr-sq-92_0

What approaches were considered for the analysis? Postdoc B: Alright. Professor C: So, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Um, so I wanted to discuss digits briefly, but that won't take too long. Professor C: Oh good. Right. OK, agenda items, Uh, we have digits, What else we got? PhD A: New version of the presegmentation. Professor C: New version of presegmentation. Postdoc B: Um, do we wanna say something about the, an update of the, uh, transcript? PhD G: Yeah, why don't you summarize the {disfmarker} Professor C: Update on transcripts. PhD G: And I guess that includes some {disfmarker} the filtering for the, the ASI refs, too. Postdoc B: Mmm. Professor C: Filtering for what? PhD G: For the references that we need to go from the {disfmarker} the {pause} fancy transcripts to the sort of {nonvocalsound} brain - dead. Postdoc B: It'll {disfmarker} it'll be {disfmarker} basically it'll be a re - cap of a meeting that we had jointly this morning. Professor C: Uh - huh. PhD G: With Don, as well. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Got it. Anything else more pressing than those things? So {disfmarker} So, why don't we just do those. You said yours was brief, so {disfmarker} Grad F: OK. OK well, the, w uh as you can see from the numbers on the digits we're almost done. The digits goes up to {pause} about four thousand. Um, and so, uh, we probably will be done with the TI - digits in, um, another couple weeks. um, depending on how many we read each time. So there were a bunch that we skipped. You know, someone fills out the form and then they're not at the meeting and so it's blank. Um, but those are almost all filled in as well. And so, once we're {disfmarker} it's done it would be very nice to train up a recognizer and actually start working with this data. PhD D: So we'll have a corpus that's the size of TI - digits? Grad F: And so {disfmarker} One particular test set of TI - digits. PhD D: Test set, OK. Grad F: So, I {disfmarker} I extracted, Ther - there was a file sitting around which people have used here as a test set. It had been randomized and so on PhD D: Grad F: and that's just what I used to generate the order. of these particular ones. PhD D: Oh! Great. Great. Professor C: So, I'm impressed by what we could do, Is take the standard training set for TI - digits, train up with whatever, you know, great features we think we have, uh for instance, and then test on uh this test set. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} Professor C: And presumably uh it should do reasonably well on that, and then, presumably, we should go to the distant mike, and it should do poorly. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: And then we should get really smart over the next year or two, and it {disfmarker} that should get better. Grad F: Right. And inc increase it by one or two percent, yeah. Professor C: Yeah, {vocalsound} Yeah. Grad F: Um, but, in order to do that we need to extract out the actual digits. Professor C: Right. Grad F: Um, so that {disfmarker} the reason it's not just a transcript is that there're false starts, and misreads, and miscues and things like that. And so I have a set of scripts and X Waves where you just select the portion, hit R, um, it tells you what the next one should be, and you just look for that. You know, so it {disfmarker} it'll put on the screen," The next set is six nine, nine two two" . And you find that, and, hit the key and it records it in a file in a particular format. Professor C: So is this {disfmarker} Grad F: And so the {disfmarker} the question is, should we have the transcribers do that or should we just do it? Well, some of us. I've been do I've done, eight meetings, something like that, just by hand. Just myself, rather. So it will not take long. Um {disfmarker} Professor C: Uh, what {disfmarker} what do you think? Postdoc B: My feeling is that we discussed this right before coffee and I think it's a {disfmarker} it's a fine idea partly because, um, it's not un unrelated to their present skill set, but it will add, for them, an extra dimension, it might be an interesting break for them. And also it is contributing to the, uh, c composition of the transcript cuz we can incorporate those numbers directly and it'll be a more complete transcript. So I'm {disfmarker} I think it's fine, that part. Grad F: There is {disfmarker} there is {disfmarker} Professor C: So you think it's fine to have the transcribers do it? Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah, OK. Grad F: There's one other small bit, which is just entering the information which at s which is at the top of this form, onto the computer, to go along with the {disfmarker} where the digits are recorded automatically. PhD D: Good. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And so it's just, you know, typing in name, times {disfmarker} time, date, and so on. Um, which again either they can do, but it is, you know, firing up an editor, or, again, I can do. Or someone else can do. Postdoc B: And, that, you know, I'm not, that {disfmarker} that one I'm not so sure if it's into the {disfmarker} the, things that, I, wanted to use the hours for, because the, the time that they'd be spending doing that they wouldn't be able to be putting more words on. Professor C: Mmm. Postdoc B: But that's really your choice, it's your {disfmarker} PhD D: So are these two separate tasks that can happen? Or do they have to happen at the same time before {disfmarker} Grad F: No they don't have {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} you have to enter the data before, you do the second task, but they don't have to happen at the same time. PhD D: OK. Grad F: So it's {disfmarker} it's just I have a file whi which has this information on it, and then when you start using my scripts, for extracting the times, it adds the times at the bottom of the file. And so, um, I mean, it's easy to create the files and leave them blank, and so actually we could do it in either order. PhD D: Oh, OK. Grad F: Um, it's {disfmarker} it's sort of nice to have the same person do it just as a double - check, to make sure you're entering for the right person. But, either way. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah just by way of uh, uh, a uh, order of magnitude, uh, um, we've been working with this Aurora, uh data set. And, uh, the best score, on the, nicest part of the data, that is, where you've got training and test set that are basically the same kinds of noise and so forth, uh, is about, uh {disfmarker} I think the best score was something like five percent, uh, error, per digit. PhD A: Per digit. Professor C: So, that {disfmarker} Grad F: Per digit. Professor C: You're right. So if you were doing {pause} ten digit, uh, recognition, {vocalsound} you would really be in trouble. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} The point there, and this is uh car noise uh, uh things, but {disfmarker} but real {disfmarker} real situation, PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: well," real" , Um, the {disfmarker} uh there's one microphone that's close, that they have as {disfmarker} as this sort of thing, close versus distant. Uh but in a car, instead of {disfmarker} instead of having a projector noise it's {disfmarker} it's car noise. Uh but it wasn't artificially added to get some {disfmarker} some artificial signal - to - noise ratio. It was just people driving around in a car. So, that's {disfmarker} that's an indication, uh that was with, many sites competing, and this was the very best score and so forth, so. More typical numbers like PhD D: Although the models weren't, that good, right? I mean, the models are pretty crappy? Professor C: You're right. I think that we could have done better on the models, but the thing is that we got {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} this is the kind of typical number, for all of the, uh, uh, things in this task, all of the, um, languages. And so I {disfmarker} I think we'd probably {disfmarker} the models would be better in some than in others. Um, so, uh. Anyway, just an indication once you get into this kind of realm even if you're looking at connected digits it can be pretty hard. PhD D: Hmm. Postdoc B: Hmm. It's gonna be fun to see how we, compare at this. Very exciting. s @ @. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: How did we do on the TI - digits? Grad F: Well the prosodics are so much different s it's gonna be, strange. I mean the prosodics are not the same as TI - digits, for example. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure how much of effect that will have. PhD D: H how do {disfmarker} PhD G: What do you mean, the prosodics? Grad F: Um, just what we were talking about with grouping. That with these, the grouping, there's no grouping at all, and so it's just {disfmarker} the only sort of discontinuity you have is at the beginning and the end. PhD G: So what are they doing in Aurora, are they reading actual phone numbers, Grad F: Aurora I don't know. I don't know what they do in Aurora. PhD G: or, a {disfmarker} a digit at a time, or {disfmarker}? Professor C: Uh, I'm not sure how {disfmarker} PhD G: Cuz it's {disfmarker} Professor C: no, no I mean it's connected {disfmarker} it's connected, uh, digits, PhD G: Connected. Professor C: yeah. But. Grad F: But {disfmarker} Right. PhD G: So there's also the {disfmarker} not just the prosody but the cross {disfmarker} the cross - word modeling is probably quite different. PhD D: H How Grad F: But in TI - digits, they're reading things like zip codes and phone numbers and things like that, PhD G: Right. PhD D: do we do on TI - digits? Grad F: so it's gonna be different. I don't remember. I mean, very good, right? Professor C: Yeah, I mean we were in the. Grad F: One and a half percent, two percent, something like that? Professor C: Uh, I th no I think we got under a percent, but it was {disfmarker} but it's {disfmarker} but I mean. The very best system that I saw in the literature was a point two five percent or something that somebody had at {disfmarker} at Bell Labs, or. Uh, but. But, uh, sort of pulling out all the stops. Grad F: Oh really? Postdoc B: s @ @. It s strikes me that there are more {disfmarker} each of them is more informative because it's so, random, Grad F: OK. Alright. PhD D: Hmm. Professor C: But I think a lot of systems sort of get half a percent, or three - quarters a percent, Grad F: Right. Professor C: and we're {disfmarker} we're in there somewhere. Grad F: But that {disfmarker} I mean it's really {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's close - talking mikes, no noise, clean signal, just digits, I mean, every everything is good. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: It's the beginning of time in speech recognition. Grad F: Yes, exactly. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And we've only recently got it to anywhere near human. PhD G: It's like the, single cell, you know, it's the beginning of life, PhD D: Pre - prehistory. PhD G: yeah. Grad F: And it's still like an order of magnitude worse than what humans do. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So. Professor C: When {disfmarker} When they're wide awake, yeah. Um, Grad F: Yeah. After coffee. Professor C: after coffee, you're right. Not after lunch. Grad F: OK, so, um, what I'll do then is I'll go ahead and enter, this data. And then, hand off to Jane, and the transcribers to do the actual extraction of the digits. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. One question I have that {disfmarker} that I mean, we wouldn't know the answer to now but might, do some guessing, but I was talking before about doing some model modeling of arti uh, uh, marking of articulatory, features, with overlap and so on. Grad F: Hmm. Professor C: And, and, um, On some subset. One thought might be to do this uh, on {disfmarker} on the digits, or some piece of the digits. Uh, it'd be easier, uh, and so forth. The only thing is I'm a little concerned that maybe the kind of phenomena, in w i i The reason for doing it is because the {disfmarker} the argument is that certainly with conversational speech, the stuff that we've looked at here before, um, just doing the simple mapping, from, um, the phone, to the corresponding features that you could look up in a book, uh, isn't right. It isn't actually right. In fact there's these overlapping processes where some voicing some up and then some, you know, some nasality is {disfmarker} comes in here, and so forth. And you do this gross thing saying" Well I guess it's this phone starting there" . So, uh, that's the reasoning. But, It could be that when we're reading digits, because it's {disfmarker} it's for such a limited set, that maybe {disfmarker} maybe that phenomenon doesn't occur as much. I don't know. Di - an anybody {disfmarker}? {pause} Do you have any {disfmarker}? {pause} Anybody have any opinion about that, Postdoc B: and that people might articulate more, and you that might end up with more {disfmarker} a closer correspondence. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad F: Yeah {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I agree. PhD D: Sort of less predictability, Grad F: That {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: and {disfmarker} You hafta {disfmarker} Grad F: It's a {disfmarker} Well {disfmarker} Would, this corpus really be the right one to even try that on? PhD G: Well it's definitely true that, when people are, reading, even if they're re - reading what, they had said spontaneously, that they have very different patterns. Mitch showed that, and some, dissertations have shown that. Professor C: Right. PhD G: So the fact that they're reading, first of all, whether they're reading in a room of, people, or rea you know, just the fact that they're reading will make a difference. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: And, depends what you're interested in. Professor C: See, I don't know. So, may maybe the thing will be do {disfmarker} to take some very small subset, I mean not have a big, program, but take a small set, uh, subset of the conversational speech and a small subset of the digits, and {pause} look and {disfmarker} and just get a feeling for it. Um, just take a look. Really. Postdoc B: H That could {disfmarker} could be an interesting design, too, cuz then you'd have the com the comparison of the, uh, predictable speech versus the less predictable speech Professor C: Cuz I don't think anybody is, I at least, I don't know, of anybody, uh, well, I don't know, {vocalsound} the answers. PhD D: Hey. Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: and maybe you'd find that it worked in, in the, case of the pr of the, uh, non - predictable. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: Hafta think about, the particular acoustic features to mark, too, because, I mean, some things, they wouldn't be able to mark, like, uh, you know, uh, tense lax. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Some things are really difficult. You know, Postdoc B: Well. PhD D: just listening. Grad F: M I think we can get Ohala in to, give us some advice on that. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: Also I thought you were thinking of a much more restricted set of features, that {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah, but I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was, like he said, {vocalsound} I was gonna bring John in and ask John what he thought. Postdoc B: Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. Professor C: Right. But I mean you want {disfmarker} you want it be restrictive but you also want it to {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} to have coverage. Grad F: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah Professor C: You know i you should. It should be such that if you, if you, uh, if you had o um, all of the features, determined that you {disfmarker} that you were uh ch have chosen, that that would tell you, uh, in the steady - state case, uh, the phone. So, um. Postdoc B: OK. Grad F: Even, I guess with vowels that would be pretty hard, wouldn't it? To identify actually, you know, which one it is? Postdoc B: It would seem to me that the points of articulation would be m more, g uh, I mean that's {disfmarker} I think about articulatory features, I think about, points of articulation, which means, uh, rather than vowels. Grad F: Yeah. PhD D: Points of articulation? What do you mean? Postdoc B: So, is it, uh, bilabial or dental or is it, you know, palatal. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: Which {disfmarker} which are all like where {disfmarker} where your tongue comes to rest. Professor C: Place, place. PhD D: Place of ar place of articulation. Grad F: Uvular. PhD A: Place. Postdoc B: Place. Thank you, what {disfmarker} whatev whatever I s said, that's {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK. Postdoc B: I really meant place. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK, I see. Professor C: Yeah. OK we got our jargon then, OK. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh. PhD G: Well it's also, there's, really a difference between, the pronunciation models in the dictionary, and, the pronunciations that people produce. And, so, You get, some of that information from Steve's work on the {disfmarker} on the labeling Professor C: Right. Grad F: Right. PhD G: and it really, I actually think that data should be used more. That maybe, although I think the meeting context is great, that he has transcriptions that give you the actual phone sequence. And you can go from {disfmarker} not from that to the articulatory features, but that would be a better starting point for marking, the gestural features, then, data where you don't have that, because, we {disfmarker} you wanna know, both about the way that they're producing a certain sound, and what kinds of, you know what kinds of, phonemic, differences you get between these, transcribed, sequences and the dictionary ones. Professor C: Well you might be right that mi might be the way at getting at, what I was talking about, but the particular reason why I was interested in doing that was because I remember, when that happened, and, John Ohala was over here and he was looking at the spectrograms of the more difficult ones. Uh, he didn't know what to say, about, what is the sequence of phones there. They came up with some compromise. Because that really wasn't what it look like. It didn't look like a sequence of phones Grad F: Right. PhD G: Right. Professor C: it look like this blending thing happening here and here and here. Grad F: Yeah, so you have this feature here, and, overlap, yeah. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: There was no name for that. PhD G: But {disfmarker} Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: But it still is {disfmarker} there's a {disfmarker} there are two steps. One {disfmarker} you know, one is going from a dictionary pronunciation of something, like," gonna see you tomorrow" , Grad F: And {disfmarker} Or" gonta" . Professor C: Right. Yeah. PhD G: it could be" going to" or" gonna" or" gonta s" you know. Professor C: Right. PhD G: And, yeah." Gonna see you tomorrow" , uh," guh see you tomorrow" . And, that it would be nice to have these, intermediate, or these {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} these reduced pronunciations that those transcribers had marked or to have people mark those as well. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Because, it's not, um, that easy to go from the, dictionary, word pronuncia the dictionary phone pronunciation, to the gestural one without this intermediate or a syllable level kind of, representation. Grad F: Well I don't think Morgan's suggesting that we do that, though. Professor C: Do you mean, PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Yeah, I mean, I I I'm jus at the moment of course we're just talking about what, to provide as a tool for people to do research who have different ideas about how to do it. So for instance, you might have someone who just has a wor has words with states, and has uh {disfmarker} uh, comes from articulatory gestures to that. And someone else, might actually want some phonetic uh intermediate thing. So I think it would be {disfmarker} be best to have all of it if we could. But {pause} um, Grad F: But {disfmarker} What I'm imagining is a score - like notation, where each line is a particular feature. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Right, Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: so you would say, you know, it's voiced through here, and so you have label here, and you have nas nasal here, and, they {disfmarker} they could be overlapping in all sorts of bizarre ways that don't correspond to the timing on phones. Professor C: I mean this is the kind of reason why {disfmarker} I remember when at one of the Switchboard, workshops, that uh when we talked about doing the transcription project, Dave Talkin said," can't be done" . Grad F: Right. Professor C: He was {disfmarker} he was, what {disfmarker} what he meant was that this isn't, you know, a sequence of phones, and when you actually look at Switchboard that's, not what you see, and, you know. And. It, Grad F: And in {disfmarker} in fact the inter - annotator agreement was not that good, right? On the harder ones? Professor C: yeah I mean it was PhD G: It depends how you look at it, and I {disfmarker} I understand what you're saying about this, kind of transcription exactly, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: because I've seen {disfmarker} you know, where does the voicing bar start and so forth. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: All I'm saying is that, it is useful to have that {disfmarker} the transcription of what was really said, and which syllables were reduced. Uh, if you're gonna add the features it's also useful to have some level of representation which is, is a reduced {disfmarker} it's a pronunciation variant, that currently the dictionaries don't give you Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: because if you add them to the dictionary and you run recognition, you, you add confusion. Professor C: Right. Right. PhD G: So people purposely don't add them. So it's useful to know which variant was {disfmarker} was produced, at least at the phone level. PhD D: So it would be {disfmarker} it would be great if we had, either these kind of, labelings on, the same portion of Switchboard that Steve marked, or, Steve's type markings on this data, with these. PhD G: Right. That's all, I mean. Exactly. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Exactly. Professor C: Yeah, no I {disfmarker} I don't disagree with that. PhD G: And Steve's type is fairly {disfmarker} it's not that slow, uh, uh, I dunno exactly what the, timing was, but. Professor C: Yeah u I don't disagree with it the on the only thing is that, What you actually will end {disfmarker} en end up with is something, i it's all compromised, right, so, the string that you end up with isn't, actually, what happened. But it's {disfmarker} it's the best compromise that a group of people scratching their heads could come up with to describe what happened. PhD D: And it's more accurate than, phone labels. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: But. And it's more accurate than the {disfmarker} than the dictionary or, if you've got a pronunciation uh lexicon that has three or four, Grad F: The word. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: this might be have been the fifth one that you tr that you pruned or whatever, PhD D: So it's like a continuum. PhD G: Right. Professor C: so sure. PhD D: It's {disfmarker} you're going all the way down, PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: yeah. PhD G: That's what I meant is {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: an and in some places it would fill in, So {disfmarker} the kinds of gestural features are not everywhere. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} PhD D: Right. PhD G: So there are some things that you don't have access to either from your ear or the spectrogram, PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD G: but you know what phone it was and that's about all you can {disfmarker} all you can say. PhD D: Right. PhD G: And then there are other cases where, nasality, voicing {disfmarker} PhD D: It's basically just having, multiple levels of {disfmarker} of, information and marking, on the signal. PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Well the other difference is that the {disfmarker} the features, are not synchronous, PhD G: Right. Grad F: right. They overlap each other in weird ways. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. Grad F: So it's not a strictly one - dimensional signal. Professor C: Right. Grad F: So I think that's sorta qualitatively different. PhD G: Right. You can add the features in, uh, but it'll be underspecified. Postdoc B: Hmm. PhD G: Th - there'll be no way for you to actually mark what was said completely by features. Grad F: Well not with our current system but you could imagine designing a system, that the states were features, rather than phones. PhD G: And i if you're {disfmarker} Well, we {disfmarker} we've probably have a {vocalsound} separate, um, discussion of, uh {disfmarker} of whether you can do that. Postdoc B: That's {disfmarker} Well, {pause} isn't that {disfmarker} I thought that was, well but that {disfmarker} wasn't that kinda the direction? Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc B: I thought Professor C: Yeah, so I mean, what, what {disfmarker} where this is, I mean, I I want would like to have something that's useful to people other than those who are doing the specific kind of research I have in mind, so it should be something broader. But, The {disfmarker} but uh where I'm coming from is, uh, we're coming off of stuff that Larry Saul did with {disfmarker} with, um, uh, John Dalan and Muzim Rahim in which, uh, they, uh, have, um, a m a multi - band system that is, uh, trained through a combination of gradient learning an and EM, to {pause} um, estimate, uh, {vocalsound} the, uh, value for m for {disfmarker} for a particular feature. OK. And this is part of a larger, image that John Dalan has about how the human brain does it in which he's sort of imagining that, individual frequency channels are coming up with their own estimate, of {disfmarker} of these, these kinds of {disfmarker} something like this. Might not be, you know, exact features that, Jakobson thought of or something. But I mean you know some, something like that. Some kind of low - level features, which are not, fully, you know, phone classification. And the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} th this particular image, of how thi how it's done, is that, then given all of these estimates at that level, there's a level above it, then which is {disfmarker} is making, some kind of sound unit classification such as, you know, phone and {disfmarker} and, you know. You could argue what, what a sound unit should be, and {disfmarker} and so forth. But that {disfmarker} that's sort of what I was imagining doing, um, and {disfmarker} but it's still open within that whether you would have an intermediate level in which it was actually phones, or not. You wouldn't necessarily have to. Um, but, Again, I wouldn't wanna, wouldn't want what we {disfmarker} we produced to be so, know, local in perspective that it {disfmarker} it was matched, what we were thinking of doing one week, And {disfmarker} and, and, you know, what you're saying is absolutely right. That, that if we, can we should put in, uh, another level of, of description there if we're gonna get into some of this low - level stuff. PhD D: Well, you know, um {disfmarker} I mean if we're talking about, having the, annotators annotate these kinds of features, it seems like, You know, you {disfmarker} The {disfmarker} the question is, do they do that on, meeting data? Or do they do that on, Switchboard? Grad F: That's what I was saying, Postdoc B: W Well it seems like you could do both. Grad F: maybe meeting data isn't the right corpus. Postdoc B: I mean, I was thinking that it would be interesting, to do it with respect to, parts of Switchboard anyway, in terms of, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} partly to see, if you could, generate first guesses at what the articulatory feature would be, based on the phone representation at that lower level. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: It might be a time gain. But also in terms of comparability of, um, Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Well cuz the yeah, and then also, if you did it on Switchboard, you would have, the full continuum of transcriptions. Postdoc B: what you gain Yep. PhD D: You'd have it, from the lowest level, the ac acoustic features, then you'd have the, you know, the phonetic level that Steve did, Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Yeah that {disfmarker} that's all I was thinking about. Postdoc B: And you could tell that {disfmarker} PhD D: and, yeah. PhD G: it is telephone band, so, the bandwidth might be {disfmarker} PhD D: It'd be a complete, set then. Postdoc B: And you get the relative gain up ahead. Professor C: It's so it's a little different. So I mean i we'll see wha how much we can, uh, get the people to do, and how much money we'll have and all this sort of thing, PhD G: Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD D: But it {disfmarker} it might be good to do what Jane was saying uh, you know, seed it, with, guesses about what we think the features are, based on, you know, the phone or Steve's transcriptions or something. to make it quicker. Professor C: but, Might be do both. Grad F: Alright, so based on the phone transcripts they would all be synchronous, but then you could imagine, nudging them here and there. PhD D: Adjusting? Yeah, exactly. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD D: Scoot the voicing over a little, because {disfmarker} Grad F: Right. Professor C: Well I think what {disfmarker} I mean I'm {disfmarker} I'm a l little behind in what they're doing, now, and, uh, the stuff they're doing on Switchboard now. But I think that, Steve and the gang are doing, something with an automatic system first and then doing some adjustment. As I re as I recall. So I mean that's probably the right way to go anyway, is to {disfmarker} is to start off with an automatic system with a pretty rich pronunciation dictionary that, that, um, you know, tries, to label it all. And then, people go through and fix it. Postdoc B: So in {disfmarker} in our case you'd think about us s starting with maybe the regular dictionary entry, and then? Or {pause} would we {disfmarker} Professor C: Well, regular dictionary, I mean, this is a pretty rich dictionary. It's got, got a fair number of pronunciations in it Postdoc B: But {disfmarker} PhD D: Or you could start from the {disfmarker} if we were gonna, do the same set, of sentences that Steve had, done, we could start with those transcriptions. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. So I was thinking {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: That's actually what I was thinking, is tha {disfmarker} PhD D: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: the problem is when you run, uh, if you run a regular dictionary, um, even if you have variants, in there, which most people don't, you don't always get, out, the actual pronunciations, PhD D: Yeah. PhD G: so that's why the human transcriber's giving you the {disfmarker} that pronunciation, Postdoc B: Yeah. Oh. Professor C: Actually maybe they're using phone recognizers. PhD G: and so y they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} I thought that they were {disfmarker} Professor C: Is that what they're doing? Grad F: They are. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: we should catch up on what Steve is, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: uh {disfmarker} I think that would be a good i good idea. Professor C: Yeah, so I think that i i we also don't have, I mean, we've got a good start on it, but we don't have a really good, meeting, recorder or recognizer or transcriber or anything yet, so. So, I mean another way to look at this is to, is to, uh, do some stuff on Switchboard which has all this other, stuff to it. PhD G: Yeah. Professor C: And then, um, As we get, further down the road and we can do more things ahead of time, we can, do some of the same things to the meeting data. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: And I'm {disfmarker} and these people might {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they are, s most of them are trained with IPA. Professor C: Yeah Postdoc B: They'd be able to do phonetic - level coding, or articulatory. PhD D: Are they busy for the next couple years, or {disfmarker}? Postdoc B: Well, you know, I mean they, they {disfmarker} they're interested in continuing working with us, so {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} I, and this would be up their alley, so, we could {disfmarker} when the {disfmarker} when you d meet with, with John Ohala and find, you know what taxonomy you want to apply, then, they'd be, good to train onto it. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, this is, not an urgent thing at all, Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: just it came up. PhD D: It'd be very interesting though, to have {pause} that data. Postdoc B: I think so, too. Grad F: I wonder, how would you do a forced alignment? PhD G: Yeah. Might {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Interesting idea. Grad F: To {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} I mean, you'd wanna iterate, somehow. Yeah. It's interesting thing to think about. PhD D: Hmm. PhD G: It might be {disfmarker} Grad F: I mean you'd {disfmarker} you'd want models for spreading. PhD G: I was thinking it might be n PhD D: Of the f acoustic features? Grad F: Yeah. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Well it might be neat to do some, phonetic, features on these, nonword words. Are {disfmarker} are these kinds of words that people never {disfmarker} the" huh" s and the" hmm" s and the" huh" {vocalsound} and the uh {disfmarker} These k No, I'm serious. There are all these kinds of {pause} functional, uh, elements. I don't know what you call {pause} them. But not just fill pauses but all kinds of ways of {pause} interrupting {comment} and so forth. Grad F: Uh - huh. PhD G: And some of them are, {vocalsound} yeah," uh - huh" s, and" hmm" s, and," hmm!" " hmm" {comment}" OK" ," uh" {comment} Grunts, uh, that might be interesting. Postdoc B: He's got lip {disfmarker} {pause} lipsmacks. PhD G: In the meetings. Professor C: We should move on. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh, new version of, uh, presegmentation? PhD A: Uh, oh yeah, um, {vocalsound} I worked a little bit on the {disfmarker} on the presegmentation to {disfmarker} to get another version which does channel - specific, uh, speech - nonspeech detection. And, what I did is I used some normalized features which, uh, look in into the {disfmarker} which is normalized energy, uh, energy normalized by the mean over the channels and by the, minimum over the, other. within each channel. And to {disfmarker} to, mm, to, yeah, to normalize also loudness and {disfmarker} and modified loudness and things and that those special features actually are in my feature vector. Grad F: Oh. PhD A: And, and, therefore to be able to, uh, somewhat distinguish between foreground and background speech in {disfmarker} in the different {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} each channel. And, eh, I tested it on {disfmarker} on three or four meetings and it seems to work, well yeah, fairly well, I {disfmarker} I would say. There are some problems with the lapel mike. Grad F: Of course. PhD A: Yeah. Uh, yeah. Grad F: Wow that's great. PhD A: And. Grad F: So I {disfmarker} I understand that's what you were saying about your problem with, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. And. Yeah, and {disfmarker} and I had {disfmarker} I had, uh, specific problems with. Grad F: I get it. So new use ninetieth quartile, rather than, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: Wow. PhD A: Yeah {disfmarker} yeah, then {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I did some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} some things like that, Postdoc B: Interesting. PhD A: as there {disfmarker} there are some {disfmarker} some problems in, when, in the channel, there {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} the the speaker doesn't {disfmarker} doesn't talk much or doesn't talk at all. Then, the, yeah, there are {disfmarker} there are some problems with {disfmarker} with {disfmarker} with n with normalization, and, then, uh, there the system doesn't work at all. So, I'm {disfmarker} I'm glad that there is the {disfmarker} the digit part, where everybody is forced to say something, Professor C: Right. PhD A: so, that's {disfmarker} that's great for {disfmarker} for my purpose. And, the thing is I {disfmarker} I, then the evaluation of {disfmarker} of the system is a little bit hard, as I don't have any references. Grad F: Well we did the hand {disfmarker} the one by hand. PhD A: Yeah, that's the one {disfmarker} one wh where I do the training on so I can't do the evaluation on So the thing is, can the transcribers perhaps do some, some {disfmarker} some meetings in {disfmarker} in terms of speech - nonspeech in {disfmarker} in the specific channels? Grad F: Uh. Postdoc B: Well, I have {disfmarker} PhD D: Well won't you have that from their transcriptions? Postdoc B: Well, OK, so, now we need {disfmarker} Grad F: No, cuz we need is really tight. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: so, um, I think I might have done what you're requesting, though I did it in the service of a different thing. PhD A: Oh, great. Postdoc B: I have thirty minutes that I've more tightly transcribed with reference to individual channels. PhD A: OK. OK, that's great. That's great for me. Yeah, so. Postdoc B: And I could {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} Grad F: Hopefully that's not the same meeting that we did. Postdoc B: No, actually it's a different meeting. Grad F: Good. PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: So, um, e so the, you know, we have the, th they transcribe as if it's one channel with these {disfmarker} with the slashes to separate the overlapping parts. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then we run it through {disfmarker} then it {disfmarker} then I'm gonna edit it and I'm gonna run it through channelize which takes it into Dave Gelbart's form format. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then you have, all these things split across according to channel, and then that means that, if a person contributed more than once in a given, overlap during that time bend that {disfmarker} that two parts of the utterance end up together, it's the same channel, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and then I took his tool, and last night for the first thirty minutes of one of these transcripts, I, tightened up the, um, boundaries on individual speakers'channels, PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: cuz his {disfmarker} his interface allows me to have total flexibility in the time tags across the channels. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And {pause} um, so. PhD A: so, yeah {disfmarker} yeah, that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that's great, but what would be nice to have some more meetings, not just one meeting to {disfmarker} to be sure that {disfmarker} that, there is a system, PhD D: So, current {disfmarker} This week. Postdoc B: Yes. Might not be what you need. Grad F: Yeah, so if we could get a couple meetings done with that level of precision I think that would be a good idea. PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: Oh, OK. Uh, how {disfmarker} how m much time {disfmarker} so the meetings vary in length, what are we talking about in terms of the number of minutes you'd like to have as your {disfmarker} as your training set? PhD A: It seems to me that it would be good to have, a few minutes from {disfmarker} from different meetings, so. But I'm not sure about how much. Postdoc B: OK, now you're saying different meetings because of different speakers or because of different audio quality or both or {disfmarker}? PhD A: Both {disfmarker} both. Different {disfmarker} different number of speakers, different speakers, different {pause} conditions. Postdoc B: OK. Professor C: Yeah, we don't have that much variety in meetings yet, uh, I mean we have this meeting and the feature meeting and we have a couple others that we have uh, couple examples of. But {disfmarker} but, uh, PhD A: Yeah, m Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Grad E: Even probably with the gains {pause} differently will affect it, you mean {disfmarker} PhD A: Uh, not really as {disfmarker} Professor C: Poten - potentially. PhD A: uh, because of the normalization, yeah. Grad E: Oh, cuz you use the normalization? OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: We can try running {disfmarker} we haven't done this yet because, um, uh, Andreas an is {disfmarker} is gonna move over the SRI recognizer. i basically I ran out of machines at SRI, PhD A: OK. PhD G: cuz we're running the evals and I just don't have machine time there. But, once that's moved over, uh, hopefully in a {disfmarker} a couple days, then, we can take, um, what Jane just told us about as, the presegmented, {vocalsound} {nonvocalsound} the {disfmarker} the segmentations that you did, at level eight or som {comment} at some, threshold that Jane, tha {pause} right, and try doing, forced alignment. um, on the word strings. Grad F: Oh, shoot! PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: The pre presegment PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: yeah. PhD A: With the recognizer? Yeah. PhD G: And if it's good, then that will {disfmarker} that may give you a good boundary. Of course if it's good, we don't {disfmarker} then we're {disfmarker} we're fine, PhD A: Yeah. M PhD G: but, I don't know yet whether these, segments that contain a lot of pauses around the words, will work or not. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I would quite like to have some manually transcribed references for {disfmarker} for the system, as I'm not sure if {disfmarker} if it's really good to compare with {disfmarker} with some other automatic, found boundaries. PhD G: Yeah. Right. Postdoc B: Well, no, if we were to start with this and then tweak it h manually, would that {disfmarker} that would be OK? PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah {pause} sure. PhD G: They might be OK. Postdoc B: OK. PhD G: It {disfmarker} you know it really depends on a lot of things, PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: but, I would have maybe a transciber, uh, look at the result of a forced alignment and then adjust those. PhD A: Yeah. To a adjust them, or, yeah. Yeah, yeah. PhD G: That might save some time. PhD A: Yeah, great. PhD G: If they're horrible it won't help at all, but they might not be horrible. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: So {disfmarker} but I'll let you know when we, uh, have that. PhD A: OK, great. Postdoc B: How many minutes would you want from {disfmarker} I mean, we could {pause} easily, get a section, you know, like say a minute or so, from every meeting that we have so f from the newer ones that we're working on, everyone that we have. And then, should provide this. PhD A: If it's not the first minute of {disfmarker} of the meeting, that {disfmarker} that's OK with me, but, in {disfmarker} in the first minute, uh, Often there are some {disfmarker} some strange things going on which {disfmarker} which aren't really, well, for, which {disfmarker} which aren't re re really good. So. What {disfmarker} what I'd quite like, perhaps, is, to have, some five minutes of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of different meetings, so. Postdoc B: Somewhere not in the very beginning, five minutes, OK. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And, then I wanted to ask you just for my inter information, then, would you, be trai cuz I don't quite unders so, would you be training then, um, the segmenter so that, it could, on the basis of that, segment the rest of the meeting? So, if I give you like {pause} five minutes is the idea that this would then be applied to, uh, to, providing tighter time {pause} bands? PhD A: I {disfmarker} I could do a {disfmarker} a retraining with that, yeah. Postdoc B: Wow, interesting. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but I hope that I {disfmarker} I don't need to do it. Postdoc B: OK. PhD A: So, uh it c can be do in an unsupervised way. Postdoc B: Uh - huh. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Excellent. Excellent, OK. PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, but, for {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} for those three meetings whi which I {disfmarker} which I did, it seems to be, quite well, but, there are some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} as I said some problems with the lapel mike, but, perhaps we can do something with {disfmarker} with cross - correlations to, to get rid of the {disfmarker} of those. And. Yeah. That's {disfmarker} that's what I {disfmarker} that's my {pause} future work. Well {disfmarker} well what I want to do is to {disfmarker} to look into cross - correlations for {disfmarker} for removing those, false overlaps. Postdoc B: Wonderful. PhD G: Are the, um, wireless, different than the wired, mikes, at all? I mean, have you noticed any difference? PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, um, if {disfmarker} if there are any wired mikes in those meetings, or, uh, I have {disfmarker} have to loo have a look at them but, I'm {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} I think there's no difference between, PhD G: So it's just the lapel versus everything else? PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so then, if that's five minutes per meeting we've got like twelve minutes, twelve meetings, roughly, that I'm {disfmarker} that I've been working with, then {disfmarker} Professor C: Of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of the meetings that you're working with, how many of them are different, tha PhD A: No. Professor C: are there any of them that are different than, these two meetings? Postdoc B: Well {disfmarker} oh wa in terms of the speakers or the conditions or the? Professor C: Yeah, speakers. Sorry. PhD A: Yeah, that {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Um, we have different combinations of speakers. Professor C: So. Postdoc B: I mean, just from what I've seen, uh, there are some where, um, you're present or not present, and, then {disfmarker} then you have the difference between the networks group and this group PhD A: Yeah, I know, some of the NSA meetings, yeah. Professor C: Yeah. So I didn't know in the group you had if you had {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: so you have the networks meeting? PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yep, we do. Professor C: Do you have any of Jerry's meetings in your, pack, er, Postdoc B: Um, no. Professor C: No? Postdoc B: We could, I mean you {disfmarker} you recorded one last week or so. I could get that new one in this week {disfmarker} I get that new one in. Grad F: Yep. u PhD G: We're gonna be recording them every {pause} Monday, Professor C: Yeah. Cuz I think he really needs variety, PhD G: so {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Great. Professor C: and {disfmarker} and having as much variety for speaker certainly would be a big part of that I think. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so if I, OK, included {disfmarker} include, OK, then, uh, if I were to include all together samples from twelve meetings that would only take an hour and I could get the transcribers to do that right {disfmarker} I mean, what I mean is, that would be an hour sampled, and then they'd transcribe those {disfmarker} that hour, right? That's what I should do? Professor C: Yeah. And. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} that's. Postdoc B: I don't mean transcribe Professor C: Right. Ye - But you're {disfmarker} y Postdoc B: I mean {disfmarker} I mean adjust. So they get it into the multi - channel format and then adjust the timebands so it's precise. Professor C: So that should be faster than the ten times kind of thing, Postdoc B: Absolutely. I did {disfmarker} I did, um, uh, so, last night I did, uh, Professor C: yeah. Postdoc B: Oh gosh, well, last night, I did about half an hour in, three hours, which is not, terrific, Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: but, um, anyway, it's an hour and a half per {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. Well, that's probably. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Well, I can't calculate on my, {vocalsound} on my feet. PhD A: Do the transcribers actually start wi with, uh, transcribing new meetings, or {pause} are they? Postdoc B: Well, um they're still working {disfmarker} they still have enough to finish that I haven't assigned a new meeting, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: but the next, m m I was about to need to assign a new meeting and I was going to take it from one of the new ones, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and I could easily give them Jerry Feldman's meeting, no problem. And, then {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD G: So they're really running out of, data, prett I mean that's good. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Uh, that first set. PhD G: Um, OK. Professor C: They're running out of data unless we s make the decision that we should go over and start, uh, transcribing the other set. PhD G: So {disfmarker} Professor C: There {disfmarker} the first {disfmarker} the first half. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And so I was in the process of like editing them but this is wonderful news. PhD A: OK. Professor C: Alright. Postdoc B: We funded the experiment with, uh {disfmarker} also we were thinking maybe applying that that to getting the, Yeah, that'll be, very useful to getting the overlaps to be more precise all the way through. Professor C: So this, blends nicely into the update on transcripts. Postdoc B: Yes, it does. So, um, {comment} um, Liz, and {disfmarker} and Don, and I met this morning, in the BARCO room, with the lecture hall, Professor C: OK. PhD G: Yeah, please. Go ahead. And this afternoon. Postdoc B: and this afternoon, it drifted into the afternoon, {comment} {vocalsound} uh, concerning this issue of, um, the, well there's basically the issue of the interplay between the transcript format and the processing that, they need to do for, the SRI recognizer. And, um, well, so, I mentioned the process that I'm going through with the data, so, you know, I get the data back from the transcri Well, s uh, metaphorically, get the data back from the transcriber, and then I, check for simple things like spelling errors and things like that. And, um, I'm going to be doing a more thorough editing, with respect to consistency of the conventions. But they're {disfmarker} they're generally very good. And, then, I run it through, uh, the channelize program to get it into the multi - channel format, OK. And {pause} the, what we discussed this morning, I would summarize as saying that, um, these units that result, in a {disfmarker} a particular channel and a particular timeband, at {disfmarker} at that level, um, vary in length. And, um, {nonvocalsound} their recognizer would prefer that the units not be overly long. But it's really an empirical question, whether the units we get at this point through, just that process I described might be sufficient for them. So, as a first pass through, a first chance without having to do a lot of hand - editing, what we're gonna do, is, I'll run it through channelize, give them those data after I've done the editing process and be sure it's clean. And I can do that, pretty quickly, with just, that minimal editing, without having to hand - break things. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: And then we'll see if the units that we're getting, uh, with the {disfmarker} at that level, are sufficient. And maybe they don't need to be further broken down. And if they do need to be further broken down then maybe it just be piece - wise, maybe it won't be the whole thing. So, that's {disfmarker} that's what we were discussing, this morning as far as I {disfmarker} Among {disfmarker} PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: also we discussed some adaptational things, PhD G: Then lots of {disfmarker} Postdoc B: so it's like, PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} You know I hadn't, uh, incorporated, a convention explicitly to handle acronyms, for example, but if someone says, PZM it would be nice to have that be directly interpretable from, the transcript what they said, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: or Pi - uh Tcl {disfmarker} TCL I mean. It's like y it's {disfmarker} and so, um, I've {disfmarker} I've incorporated also convention, with that but that's easy to handle at the post editing phase, and I'll mention it to, transcribers for the next phase but that's OK. And then, a similar conv uh, convention for numbers. So if they say one - eighty - three versus one eight three. Um, and also I'll be, um, encoding, as I do my post - editing, the, things that are in curly brackets, which are clarificational material. And eh to incorporate, uh, keyword, at the beginning. So, it's gonna be either a gloss or it's gonna be a vocal sound like a, laugh or a cough, or, so forth. Or a non - vocal sound like a doors door - slam, and that can be easily done with a, you know, just a {disfmarker} one little additional thing in the, in the general format. PhD G: Yeah we j we just needed a way to, strip, you know, all the comments, all the things th the {disfmarker} that linguist wants but the recognizer can't do anything with. Um, but to keep things that we mapped to like reject models, or, you know, uh, mouth noise, or, cough. And then there's this interesting issue Jane brought up which I hadn't thought about before but I was, realizing as I went through the transcripts, that there are some noises like, um, well the {disfmarker} good example was an inbreath, where a transcriber working from, the mixed, signal, doesn't know whose breath it is, Grad F: Right. PhD G: and they've been assigning it to someone that may or may not be correct. And what we do is, if it's a breath sound, you know, a sound from the speaker, we map it, to, a noise model, like a mouth - noise model in the recognizer, and, yeah, it probably doesn't hurt that much once in a while to have these, but, if they're in the wrong channel, that's, not a good idea. And then there's also, things like door - slams that's really in no one's channel, they're like {disfmarker} it's in the room. PhD A: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: And {pause} uh, Jane had this nice, uh, idea of having, like an extra, uh couple tiers, Grad F: An extra channel. Postdoc B: Yeah. I've been {disfmarker} I've been adding that to the ones I've been editing. PhD G: yeah. And we were thinking, that is useful also when there's uncertainties. So if they hear a breath and they don't know who breath it is it's better to put it in that channel than to put it in the speaker's channel because maybe it was someone else's breath, or {disfmarker} Uh, so I think that's a good {disfmarker} you can always clean that up, post - processing. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So a lot of little details, but I think we're, coming to some kinda closure, on that. So the idea is then, uh, Don can take, uh, Jane's post - processed channelized version, and, with some scripts, you know, convert that to {disfmarker} to a reference for the recognizer and we can, can run these. So {pause} when that's, ready {disfmarker} you know, as soon as that's ready, and as soon as the recognizer is here we can get, twelve hours of force - aligned and recognized data. And, you know, start, working on it, Postdoc B: And {disfmarker} PhD G: so we're, I dunno a coup a week or two away I would say from, uh, if {disfmarker} if that process is automatic once we get your post - process, transcript. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. And that doesn't {disfmarker} the amount of editing that it would require is not very much either. I'm just hoping that the units that are provided in that way, {nonvocalsound} will be sufficient cuz I would save a lot of, uh, time, dividing things. PhD G: Yeah, some of them are quite long. Just from {disfmarker} I dunno how long were {disfmarker} you did one? Grad E: I saw a couple, {vocalsound} around twenty seconds, and that was just without looking too hard for it, so, I would imagine that there might be some that are longer. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Well n One question, e w would that be a single speaker or is that multiple speakers overlapping? Grad E: No. No, but if we're gonna segment it, like if there's one speaker in there, that says" OK" or something, right in the middle, it's gonna have a lot of dead time around it, PhD G: Right. It's not the {disfmarker} it's not the fact that we can't process a twenty second segment, it's the fact that, there's twenty seconds in which to place one word in the wrong place Grad E: so it's not {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Yeah. Grad E: Yeah. PhD G: You know, if {disfmarker} if someone has a very short utterance there, and that's where, we, might wanna have this individual, you know, ha have your pre pre - process input. PhD A: Yep. Yeah. Sure. Postdoc B: That's very important. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I thought that perhaps the transcribers could start then from the {disfmarker} those mult multi - channel, uh, speech - nonspeech detections, if they would like to. PhD G: And I just don't know, I have to run it. Postdoc B: In {disfmarker} in doing the hand - marking? PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yeah that's what I was thinking, too. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So that's probably what will happen, but we'll try it this way and see. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: I mean it's probably good enough for force - alignment. If it's not then we're really {disfmarker} then we def definitely PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: uh, but for free recognition I'm {disfmarker} it'll probably not be good enough. We'll probably get lots of errors because of the cross - talk, and, noises and things. PhD A: Yep. Professor C: Good s I think that's probably our agenda, or starting up there. Postdoc B: Oh I wanted to ask one thing, the microphones {disfmarker} the new microphones, Professor C: Yeah? K. Postdoc B: when do we get, uh? Grad F: Uh, they said it would take about a week. Postdoc B: Oh, exciting. K. K. Professor C: K. PhD D: You ordered them already? Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Great. PhD G: So what happens to our old microphones? Professor C: They go where old microphones go. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} PhD G: Do we give them to someone, or {disfmarker}? Grad F: Well the only thing we're gonna have extra, for now, PhD G: We don't have more receivers, we just have {disfmarker} Grad F: Right, we don so the only thing we'll have extra now is just the lapel. PhD G: Right. Grad F: Not {disfmarker} not the, bodypack, just the lapel. PhD G: Just the lapel itself. Grad F: Um, and then one of the {disfmarker} one of those. Since, what I decided to do, on Morgan's suggestion, was just get two, new microphones, um, and try them out. And then, if we like them we'll get more. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: OK. Grad F: Since they're {disfmarker} they're like two hundred bucks a piece, we won't, uh, at least try them out. PhD D: So it's a replacement for this headset mike? Grad F: Yep. Yep. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And they're gonna do the wiring for us. PhD D: What's the, um, style of the headset? Grad F: It's, um, it's by Crown, and it's one of these sort of mount around the ear thingies, and, uh, when I s when I mentioned that we thought it was uncomfortable he said it was a common problem with the Sony. And this is how apparently a lot of people are getting around it. PhD D: Hmm. Grad F: And I checked on the web, and every site I went to, raved about this particular mike. It's apparently comfortable and stays on the head well, so we'll see if it's any good. But, uh, I think it's promising. Postdoc B: You said it was used by aerobics instructors? Grad F: Yep. Yep, so it was {disfmarker} it was advertised for performers Postdoc B: That says a lot. Grad E: Hmm. Professor C: For the recor for the record Adam is not a paid employee or a consultant of Crown. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Excuse me? Postdoc B: Oh. Professor C: I said" For the record Adam is {disfmarker} is not a paid consultant or employee of Crown" . Grad F: Excuse me? PhD G: Right. Grad F: That's right. PhD G: However, he may be solicited after these meetings are distributed. Grad F: Well we're using the Crown P Z Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Don't worry about finishing your dissertation. Grad F: These are Crown aren't they? Professor C: Right. Grad F: The P Z Ms are Crown, aren't they? Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah, I thought they were. Professor C: You bet. You bet. Grad F: And they work very well. PhD G: Yes. Professor C: So if we go to a workshop about all this {disfmarker} this it's gonna be a meeting about meetings about meetings. OK. So. Grad F: And then it {disfmarker} we have to go to the planning session for that workshop. Professor C: Oh, yeah, what {disfmarker} Which'll be the meeting about the meeting about the meeting. PhD D: Oh, god. Grad F: Cuz then it would be a meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meetings. Postdoc B: Professor C: Yeah? Just start saying" M four" . Yeah, OK. Grad F: Yeah. M to the fourth. Professor C: Should we do the digits? Grad F: Yep, go for it. Professor C: OK. PhD A: S {pause} s Grad F: Pause between the lines, remember? Grad E: Excuse me. Grad F: OK. Professor C: OK. PhD G: Huh.

The group discussed the prospect of performing fine-grained acoustic-phonetic analyses on a subset of digits or Switchboard data. It was suggested that prior to the use of data-driven methods, knowledge-driven approaches should be used to'seed'the data with sub-phonemic features, either manually, or using a rich pronunciation dictionary. A new version of the pre-segmentation tool that segments channel-specific speech/non-speech portions of the signal has been developed and tested.

tr-gq-93

tr-gq-93_0

Summarize the meeting. Postdoc B: Alright. Professor C: So, uh {disfmarker} Grad F: Um, so I wanted to discuss digits briefly, but that won't take too long. Professor C: Oh good. Right. OK, agenda items, Uh, we have digits, What else we got? PhD A: New version of the presegmentation. Professor C: New version of presegmentation. Postdoc B: Um, do we wanna say something about the, an update of the, uh, transcript? PhD G: Yeah, why don't you summarize the {disfmarker} Professor C: Update on transcripts. PhD G: And I guess that includes some {disfmarker} the filtering for the, the ASI refs, too. Postdoc B: Mmm. Professor C: Filtering for what? PhD G: For the references that we need to go from the {disfmarker} the {pause} fancy transcripts to the sort of {nonvocalsound} brain - dead. Postdoc B: It'll {disfmarker} it'll be {disfmarker} basically it'll be a re - cap of a meeting that we had jointly this morning. Professor C: Uh - huh. PhD G: With Don, as well. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Got it. Anything else more pressing than those things? So {disfmarker} So, why don't we just do those. You said yours was brief, so {disfmarker} Grad F: OK. OK well, the, w uh as you can see from the numbers on the digits we're almost done. The digits goes up to {pause} about four thousand. Um, and so, uh, we probably will be done with the TI - digits in, um, another couple weeks. um, depending on how many we read each time. So there were a bunch that we skipped. You know, someone fills out the form and then they're not at the meeting and so it's blank. Um, but those are almost all filled in as well. And so, once we're {disfmarker} it's done it would be very nice to train up a recognizer and actually start working with this data. PhD D: So we'll have a corpus that's the size of TI - digits? Grad F: And so {disfmarker} One particular test set of TI - digits. PhD D: Test set, OK. Grad F: So, I {disfmarker} I extracted, Ther - there was a file sitting around which people have used here as a test set. It had been randomized and so on PhD D: Grad F: and that's just what I used to generate the order. of these particular ones. PhD D: Oh! Great. Great. Professor C: So, I'm impressed by what we could do, Is take the standard training set for TI - digits, train up with whatever, you know, great features we think we have, uh for instance, and then test on uh this test set. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} Professor C: And presumably uh it should do reasonably well on that, and then, presumably, we should go to the distant mike, and it should do poorly. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: And then we should get really smart over the next year or two, and it {disfmarker} that should get better. Grad F: Right. And inc increase it by one or two percent, yeah. Professor C: Yeah, {vocalsound} Yeah. Grad F: Um, but, in order to do that we need to extract out the actual digits. Professor C: Right. Grad F: Um, so that {disfmarker} the reason it's not just a transcript is that there're false starts, and misreads, and miscues and things like that. And so I have a set of scripts and X Waves where you just select the portion, hit R, um, it tells you what the next one should be, and you just look for that. You know, so it {disfmarker} it'll put on the screen," The next set is six nine, nine two two" . And you find that, and, hit the key and it records it in a file in a particular format. Professor C: So is this {disfmarker} Grad F: And so the {disfmarker} the question is, should we have the transcribers do that or should we just do it? Well, some of us. I've been do I've done, eight meetings, something like that, just by hand. Just myself, rather. So it will not take long. Um {disfmarker} Professor C: Uh, what {disfmarker} what do you think? Postdoc B: My feeling is that we discussed this right before coffee and I think it's a {disfmarker} it's a fine idea partly because, um, it's not un unrelated to their present skill set, but it will add, for them, an extra dimension, it might be an interesting break for them. And also it is contributing to the, uh, c composition of the transcript cuz we can incorporate those numbers directly and it'll be a more complete transcript. So I'm {disfmarker} I think it's fine, that part. Grad F: There is {disfmarker} there is {disfmarker} Professor C: So you think it's fine to have the transcribers do it? Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah, OK. Grad F: There's one other small bit, which is just entering the information which at s which is at the top of this form, onto the computer, to go along with the {disfmarker} where the digits are recorded automatically. PhD D: Good. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And so it's just, you know, typing in name, times {disfmarker} time, date, and so on. Um, which again either they can do, but it is, you know, firing up an editor, or, again, I can do. Or someone else can do. Postdoc B: And, that, you know, I'm not, that {disfmarker} that one I'm not so sure if it's into the {disfmarker} the, things that, I, wanted to use the hours for, because the, the time that they'd be spending doing that they wouldn't be able to be putting more words on. Professor C: Mmm. Postdoc B: But that's really your choice, it's your {disfmarker} PhD D: So are these two separate tasks that can happen? Or do they have to happen at the same time before {disfmarker} Grad F: No they don't have {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} you have to enter the data before, you do the second task, but they don't have to happen at the same time. PhD D: OK. Grad F: So it's {disfmarker} it's just I have a file whi which has this information on it, and then when you start using my scripts, for extracting the times, it adds the times at the bottom of the file. And so, um, I mean, it's easy to create the files and leave them blank, and so actually we could do it in either order. PhD D: Oh, OK. Grad F: Um, it's {disfmarker} it's sort of nice to have the same person do it just as a double - check, to make sure you're entering for the right person. But, either way. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah just by way of uh, uh, a uh, order of magnitude, uh, um, we've been working with this Aurora, uh data set. And, uh, the best score, on the, nicest part of the data, that is, where you've got training and test set that are basically the same kinds of noise and so forth, uh, is about, uh {disfmarker} I think the best score was something like five percent, uh, error, per digit. PhD A: Per digit. Professor C: So, that {disfmarker} Grad F: Per digit. Professor C: You're right. So if you were doing {pause} ten digit, uh, recognition, {vocalsound} you would really be in trouble. So {disfmarker} So the {disfmarker} The point there, and this is uh car noise uh, uh things, but {disfmarker} but real {disfmarker} real situation, PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: well," real" , Um, the {disfmarker} uh there's one microphone that's close, that they have as {disfmarker} as this sort of thing, close versus distant. Uh but in a car, instead of {disfmarker} instead of having a projector noise it's {disfmarker} it's car noise. Uh but it wasn't artificially added to get some {disfmarker} some artificial signal - to - noise ratio. It was just people driving around in a car. So, that's {disfmarker} that's an indication, uh that was with, many sites competing, and this was the very best score and so forth, so. More typical numbers like PhD D: Although the models weren't, that good, right? I mean, the models are pretty crappy? Professor C: You're right. I think that we could have done better on the models, but the thing is that we got {disfmarker} this {disfmarker} this is the kind of typical number, for all of the, uh, uh, things in this task, all of the, um, languages. And so I {disfmarker} I think we'd probably {disfmarker} the models would be better in some than in others. Um, so, uh. Anyway, just an indication once you get into this kind of realm even if you're looking at connected digits it can be pretty hard. PhD D: Hmm. Postdoc B: Hmm. It's gonna be fun to see how we, compare at this. Very exciting. s @ @. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: How did we do on the TI - digits? Grad F: Well the prosodics are so much different s it's gonna be, strange. I mean the prosodics are not the same as TI - digits, for example. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure how much of effect that will have. PhD D: H how do {disfmarker} PhD G: What do you mean, the prosodics? Grad F: Um, just what we were talking about with grouping. That with these, the grouping, there's no grouping at all, and so it's just {disfmarker} the only sort of discontinuity you have is at the beginning and the end. PhD G: So what are they doing in Aurora, are they reading actual phone numbers, Grad F: Aurora I don't know. I don't know what they do in Aurora. PhD G: or, a {disfmarker} a digit at a time, or {disfmarker}? Professor C: Uh, I'm not sure how {disfmarker} PhD G: Cuz it's {disfmarker} Professor C: no, no I mean it's connected {disfmarker} it's connected, uh, digits, PhD G: Connected. Professor C: yeah. But. Grad F: But {disfmarker} Right. PhD G: So there's also the {disfmarker} not just the prosody but the cross {disfmarker} the cross - word modeling is probably quite different. PhD D: H How Grad F: But in TI - digits, they're reading things like zip codes and phone numbers and things like that, PhD G: Right. PhD D: do we do on TI - digits? Grad F: so it's gonna be different. I don't remember. I mean, very good, right? Professor C: Yeah, I mean we were in the. Grad F: One and a half percent, two percent, something like that? Professor C: Uh, I th no I think we got under a percent, but it was {disfmarker} but it's {disfmarker} but I mean. The very best system that I saw in the literature was a point two five percent or something that somebody had at {disfmarker} at Bell Labs, or. Uh, but. But, uh, sort of pulling out all the stops. Grad F: Oh really? Postdoc B: s @ @. It s strikes me that there are more {disfmarker} each of them is more informative because it's so, random, Grad F: OK. Alright. PhD D: Hmm. Professor C: But I think a lot of systems sort of get half a percent, or three - quarters a percent, Grad F: Right. Professor C: and we're {disfmarker} we're in there somewhere. Grad F: But that {disfmarker} I mean it's really {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's close - talking mikes, no noise, clean signal, just digits, I mean, every everything is good. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: It's the beginning of time in speech recognition. Grad F: Yes, exactly. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And we've only recently got it to anywhere near human. PhD G: It's like the, single cell, you know, it's the beginning of life, PhD D: Pre - prehistory. PhD G: yeah. Grad F: And it's still like an order of magnitude worse than what humans do. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: So. Professor C: When {disfmarker} When they're wide awake, yeah. Um, Grad F: Yeah. After coffee. Professor C: after coffee, you're right. Not after lunch. Grad F: OK, so, um, what I'll do then is I'll go ahead and enter, this data. And then, hand off to Jane, and the transcribers to do the actual extraction of the digits. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. One question I have that {disfmarker} that I mean, we wouldn't know the answer to now but might, do some guessing, but I was talking before about doing some model modeling of arti uh, uh, marking of articulatory, features, with overlap and so on. Grad F: Hmm. Professor C: And, and, um, On some subset. One thought might be to do this uh, on {disfmarker} on the digits, or some piece of the digits. Uh, it'd be easier, uh, and so forth. The only thing is I'm a little concerned that maybe the kind of phenomena, in w i i The reason for doing it is because the {disfmarker} the argument is that certainly with conversational speech, the stuff that we've looked at here before, um, just doing the simple mapping, from, um, the phone, to the corresponding features that you could look up in a book, uh, isn't right. It isn't actually right. In fact there's these overlapping processes where some voicing some up and then some, you know, some nasality is {disfmarker} comes in here, and so forth. And you do this gross thing saying" Well I guess it's this phone starting there" . So, uh, that's the reasoning. But, It could be that when we're reading digits, because it's {disfmarker} it's for such a limited set, that maybe {disfmarker} maybe that phenomenon doesn't occur as much. I don't know. Di - an anybody {disfmarker}? {pause} Do you have any {disfmarker}? {pause} Anybody have any opinion about that, Postdoc B: and that people might articulate more, and you that might end up with more {disfmarker} a closer correspondence. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Grad F: Yeah {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I agree. PhD D: Sort of less predictability, Grad F: That {disfmarker} it's just {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: and {disfmarker} You hafta {disfmarker} Grad F: It's a {disfmarker} Well {disfmarker} Would, this corpus really be the right one to even try that on? PhD G: Well it's definitely true that, when people are, reading, even if they're re - reading what, they had said spontaneously, that they have very different patterns. Mitch showed that, and some, dissertations have shown that. Professor C: Right. PhD G: So the fact that they're reading, first of all, whether they're reading in a room of, people, or rea you know, just the fact that they're reading will make a difference. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: And, depends what you're interested in. Professor C: See, I don't know. So, may maybe the thing will be do {disfmarker} to take some very small subset, I mean not have a big, program, but take a small set, uh, subset of the conversational speech and a small subset of the digits, and {pause} look and {disfmarker} and just get a feeling for it. Um, just take a look. Really. Postdoc B: H That could {disfmarker} could be an interesting design, too, cuz then you'd have the com the comparison of the, uh, predictable speech versus the less predictable speech Professor C: Cuz I don't think anybody is, I at least, I don't know, of anybody, uh, well, I don't know, {vocalsound} the answers. PhD D: Hey. Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: and maybe you'd find that it worked in, in the, case of the pr of the, uh, non - predictable. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: Hafta think about, the particular acoustic features to mark, too, because, I mean, some things, they wouldn't be able to mark, like, uh, you know, uh, tense lax. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Some things are really difficult. You know, Postdoc B: Well. PhD D: just listening. Grad F: M I think we can get Ohala in to, give us some advice on that. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: Also I thought you were thinking of a much more restricted set of features, that {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah, but I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I was, like he said, {vocalsound} I was gonna bring John in and ask John what he thought. Postdoc B: Yeah, sure. Sure. Yeah. Professor C: Right. But I mean you want {disfmarker} you want it be restrictive but you also want it to {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} to have coverage. Grad F: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah Professor C: You know i you should. It should be such that if you, if you, uh, if you had o um, all of the features, determined that you {disfmarker} that you were uh ch have chosen, that that would tell you, uh, in the steady - state case, uh, the phone. So, um. Postdoc B: OK. Grad F: Even, I guess with vowels that would be pretty hard, wouldn't it? To identify actually, you know, which one it is? Postdoc B: It would seem to me that the points of articulation would be m more, g uh, I mean that's {disfmarker} I think about articulatory features, I think about, points of articulation, which means, uh, rather than vowels. Grad F: Yeah. PhD D: Points of articulation? What do you mean? Postdoc B: So, is it, uh, bilabial or dental or is it, you know, palatal. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: Which {disfmarker} which are all like where {disfmarker} where your tongue comes to rest. Professor C: Place, place. PhD D: Place of ar place of articulation. Grad F: Uvular. PhD A: Place. Postdoc B: Place. Thank you, what {disfmarker} whatev whatever I s said, that's {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK. Postdoc B: I really meant place. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: OK, I see. Professor C: Yeah. OK we got our jargon then, OK. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh. PhD G: Well it's also, there's, really a difference between, the pronunciation models in the dictionary, and, the pronunciations that people produce. And, so, You get, some of that information from Steve's work on the {disfmarker} on the labeling Professor C: Right. Grad F: Right. PhD G: and it really, I actually think that data should be used more. That maybe, although I think the meeting context is great, that he has transcriptions that give you the actual phone sequence. And you can go from {disfmarker} not from that to the articulatory features, but that would be a better starting point for marking, the gestural features, then, data where you don't have that, because, we {disfmarker} you wanna know, both about the way that they're producing a certain sound, and what kinds of, you know what kinds of, phonemic, differences you get between these, transcribed, sequences and the dictionary ones. Professor C: Well you might be right that mi might be the way at getting at, what I was talking about, but the particular reason why I was interested in doing that was because I remember, when that happened, and, John Ohala was over here and he was looking at the spectrograms of the more difficult ones. Uh, he didn't know what to say, about, what is the sequence of phones there. They came up with some compromise. Because that really wasn't what it look like. It didn't look like a sequence of phones Grad F: Right. PhD G: Right. Professor C: it look like this blending thing happening here and here and here. Grad F: Yeah, so you have this feature here, and, overlap, yeah. PhD G: Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: There was no name for that. PhD G: But {disfmarker} Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: But it still is {disfmarker} there's a {disfmarker} there are two steps. One {disfmarker} you know, one is going from a dictionary pronunciation of something, like," gonna see you tomorrow" , Grad F: And {disfmarker} Or" gonta" . Professor C: Right. Yeah. PhD G: it could be" going to" or" gonna" or" gonta s" you know. Professor C: Right. PhD G: And, yeah." Gonna see you tomorrow" , uh," guh see you tomorrow" . And, that it would be nice to have these, intermediate, or these {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} these reduced pronunciations that those transcribers had marked or to have people mark those as well. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Because, it's not, um, that easy to go from the, dictionary, word pronuncia the dictionary phone pronunciation, to the gestural one without this intermediate or a syllable level kind of, representation. Grad F: Well I don't think Morgan's suggesting that we do that, though. Professor C: Do you mean, PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Yeah, I mean, I I I'm jus at the moment of course we're just talking about what, to provide as a tool for people to do research who have different ideas about how to do it. So for instance, you might have someone who just has a wor has words with states, and has uh {disfmarker} uh, comes from articulatory gestures to that. And someone else, might actually want some phonetic uh intermediate thing. So I think it would be {disfmarker} be best to have all of it if we could. But {pause} um, Grad F: But {disfmarker} What I'm imagining is a score - like notation, where each line is a particular feature. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Right, Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: so you would say, you know, it's voiced through here, and so you have label here, and you have nas nasal here, and, they {disfmarker} they could be overlapping in all sorts of bizarre ways that don't correspond to the timing on phones. Professor C: I mean this is the kind of reason why {disfmarker} I remember when at one of the Switchboard, workshops, that uh when we talked about doing the transcription project, Dave Talkin said," can't be done" . Grad F: Right. Professor C: He was {disfmarker} he was, what {disfmarker} what he meant was that this isn't, you know, a sequence of phones, and when you actually look at Switchboard that's, not what you see, and, you know. And. It, Grad F: And in {disfmarker} in fact the inter - annotator agreement was not that good, right? On the harder ones? Professor C: yeah I mean it was PhD G: It depends how you look at it, and I {disfmarker} I understand what you're saying about this, kind of transcription exactly, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: because I've seen {disfmarker} you know, where does the voicing bar start and so forth. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: All I'm saying is that, it is useful to have that {disfmarker} the transcription of what was really said, and which syllables were reduced. Uh, if you're gonna add the features it's also useful to have some level of representation which is, is a reduced {disfmarker} it's a pronunciation variant, that currently the dictionaries don't give you Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD G: because if you add them to the dictionary and you run recognition, you, you add confusion. Professor C: Right. Right. PhD G: So people purposely don't add them. So it's useful to know which variant was {disfmarker} was produced, at least at the phone level. PhD D: So it would be {disfmarker} it would be great if we had, either these kind of, labelings on, the same portion of Switchboard that Steve marked, or, Steve's type markings on this data, with these. PhD G: Right. That's all, I mean. Exactly. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Exactly. Professor C: Yeah, no I {disfmarker} I don't disagree with that. PhD G: And Steve's type is fairly {disfmarker} it's not that slow, uh, uh, I dunno exactly what the, timing was, but. Professor C: Yeah u I don't disagree with it the on the only thing is that, What you actually will end {disfmarker} en end up with is something, i it's all compromised, right, so, the string that you end up with isn't, actually, what happened. But it's {disfmarker} it's the best compromise that a group of people scratching their heads could come up with to describe what happened. PhD D: And it's more accurate than, phone labels. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: But. And it's more accurate than the {disfmarker} than the dictionary or, if you've got a pronunciation uh lexicon that has three or four, Grad F: The word. PhD D: Yeah. Professor C: this might be have been the fifth one that you tr that you pruned or whatever, PhD D: So it's like a continuum. PhD G: Right. Professor C: so sure. PhD D: It's {disfmarker} you're going all the way down, PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. PhD D: yeah. PhD G: That's what I meant is {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: an and in some places it would fill in, So {disfmarker} the kinds of gestural features are not everywhere. Grad F: Well {disfmarker} PhD D: Right. PhD G: So there are some things that you don't have access to either from your ear or the spectrogram, PhD D: Mm - hmm. PhD G: but you know what phone it was and that's about all you can {disfmarker} all you can say. PhD D: Right. PhD G: And then there are other cases where, nasality, voicing {disfmarker} PhD D: It's basically just having, multiple levels of {disfmarker} of, information and marking, on the signal. PhD G: Right. Right. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Well the other difference is that the {disfmarker} the features, are not synchronous, PhD G: Right. Grad F: right. They overlap each other in weird ways. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. Grad F: So it's not a strictly one - dimensional signal. Professor C: Right. Grad F: So I think that's sorta qualitatively different. PhD G: Right. You can add the features in, uh, but it'll be underspecified. Postdoc B: Hmm. PhD G: Th - there'll be no way for you to actually mark what was said completely by features. Grad F: Well not with our current system but you could imagine designing a system, that the states were features, rather than phones. PhD G: And i if you're {disfmarker} Well, we {disfmarker} we've probably have a {vocalsound} separate, um, discussion of, uh {disfmarker} of whether you can do that. Postdoc B: That's {disfmarker} Well, {pause} isn't that {disfmarker} I thought that was, well but that {disfmarker} wasn't that kinda the direction? Grad F: Yeah. Postdoc B: I thought Professor C: Yeah, so I mean, what, what {disfmarker} where this is, I mean, I I want would like to have something that's useful to people other than those who are doing the specific kind of research I have in mind, so it should be something broader. But, The {disfmarker} but uh where I'm coming from is, uh, we're coming off of stuff that Larry Saul did with {disfmarker} with, um, uh, John Dalan and Muzim Rahim in which, uh, they, uh, have, um, a m a multi - band system that is, uh, trained through a combination of gradient learning an and EM, to {pause} um, estimate, uh, {vocalsound} the, uh, value for m for {disfmarker} for a particular feature. OK. And this is part of a larger, image that John Dalan has about how the human brain does it in which he's sort of imagining that, individual frequency channels are coming up with their own estimate, of {disfmarker} of these, these kinds of {disfmarker} something like this. Might not be, you know, exact features that, Jakobson thought of or something. But I mean you know some, something like that. Some kind of low - level features, which are not, fully, you know, phone classification. And the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} th this particular image, of how thi how it's done, is that, then given all of these estimates at that level, there's a level above it, then which is {disfmarker} is making, some kind of sound unit classification such as, you know, phone and {disfmarker} and, you know. You could argue what, what a sound unit should be, and {disfmarker} and so forth. But that {disfmarker} that's sort of what I was imagining doing, um, and {disfmarker} but it's still open within that whether you would have an intermediate level in which it was actually phones, or not. You wouldn't necessarily have to. Um, but, Again, I wouldn't wanna, wouldn't want what we {disfmarker} we produced to be so, know, local in perspective that it {disfmarker} it was matched, what we were thinking of doing one week, And {disfmarker} and, and, you know, what you're saying is absolutely right. That, that if we, can we should put in, uh, another level of, of description there if we're gonna get into some of this low - level stuff. PhD D: Well, you know, um {disfmarker} I mean if we're talking about, having the, annotators annotate these kinds of features, it seems like, You know, you {disfmarker} The {disfmarker} the question is, do they do that on, meeting data? Or do they do that on, Switchboard? Grad F: That's what I was saying, Postdoc B: W Well it seems like you could do both. Grad F: maybe meeting data isn't the right corpus. Postdoc B: I mean, I was thinking that it would be interesting, to do it with respect to, parts of Switchboard anyway, in terms of, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} partly to see, if you could, generate first guesses at what the articulatory feature would be, based on the phone representation at that lower level. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: It might be a time gain. But also in terms of comparability of, um, Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Well cuz the yeah, and then also, if you did it on Switchboard, you would have, the full continuum of transcriptions. Postdoc B: what you gain Yep. PhD D: You'd have it, from the lowest level, the ac acoustic features, then you'd have the, you know, the phonetic level that Steve did, Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. PhD G: Yeah that {disfmarker} that's all I was thinking about. Postdoc B: And you could tell that {disfmarker} PhD D: and, yeah. PhD G: it is telephone band, so, the bandwidth might be {disfmarker} PhD D: It'd be a complete, set then. Postdoc B: And you get the relative gain up ahead. Professor C: It's so it's a little different. So I mean i we'll see wha how much we can, uh, get the people to do, and how much money we'll have and all this sort of thing, PhD G: Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Mm - hmm. PhD D: But it {disfmarker} it might be good to do what Jane was saying uh, you know, seed it, with, guesses about what we think the features are, based on, you know, the phone or Steve's transcriptions or something. to make it quicker. Professor C: but, Might be do both. Grad F: Alright, so based on the phone transcripts they would all be synchronous, but then you could imagine, nudging them here and there. PhD D: Adjusting? Yeah, exactly. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD D: Scoot the voicing over a little, because {disfmarker} Grad F: Right. Professor C: Well I think what {disfmarker} I mean I'm {disfmarker} I'm a l little behind in what they're doing, now, and, uh, the stuff they're doing on Switchboard now. But I think that, Steve and the gang are doing, something with an automatic system first and then doing some adjustment. As I re as I recall. So I mean that's probably the right way to go anyway, is to {disfmarker} is to start off with an automatic system with a pretty rich pronunciation dictionary that, that, um, you know, tries, to label it all. And then, people go through and fix it. Postdoc B: So in {disfmarker} in our case you'd think about us s starting with maybe the regular dictionary entry, and then? Or {pause} would we {disfmarker} Professor C: Well, regular dictionary, I mean, this is a pretty rich dictionary. It's got, got a fair number of pronunciations in it Postdoc B: But {disfmarker} PhD D: Or you could start from the {disfmarker} if we were gonna, do the same set, of sentences that Steve had, done, we could start with those transcriptions. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. So I was thinking {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: That's actually what I was thinking, is tha {disfmarker} PhD D: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: the problem is when you run, uh, if you run a regular dictionary, um, even if you have variants, in there, which most people don't, you don't always get, out, the actual pronunciations, PhD D: Yeah. PhD G: so that's why the human transcriber's giving you the {disfmarker} that pronunciation, Postdoc B: Yeah. Oh. Professor C: Actually maybe they're using phone recognizers. PhD G: and so y they {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} I thought that they were {disfmarker} Professor C: Is that what they're doing? Grad F: They are. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: we should catch up on what Steve is, Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: uh {disfmarker} I think that would be a good i good idea. Professor C: Yeah, so I think that i i we also don't have, I mean, we've got a good start on it, but we don't have a really good, meeting, recorder or recognizer or transcriber or anything yet, so. So, I mean another way to look at this is to, is to, uh, do some stuff on Switchboard which has all this other, stuff to it. PhD G: Yeah. Professor C: And then, um, As we get, further down the road and we can do more things ahead of time, we can, do some of the same things to the meeting data. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: OK. PhD D: Yeah. Postdoc B: And I'm {disfmarker} and these people might {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} they are, s most of them are trained with IPA. Professor C: Yeah Postdoc B: They'd be able to do phonetic - level coding, or articulatory. PhD D: Are they busy for the next couple years, or {disfmarker}? Postdoc B: Well, you know, I mean they, they {disfmarker} they're interested in continuing working with us, so {disfmarker} I mean {disfmarker} I, and this would be up their alley, so, we could {disfmarker} when the {disfmarker} when you d meet with, with John Ohala and find, you know what taxonomy you want to apply, then, they'd be, good to train onto it. Professor C: Yeah. Yeah. Anyway, this is, not an urgent thing at all, Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: just it came up. PhD D: It'd be very interesting though, to have {pause} that data. Postdoc B: I think so, too. Grad F: I wonder, how would you do a forced alignment? PhD G: Yeah. Might {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Interesting idea. Grad F: To {disfmarker} to {disfmarker} I mean, you'd wanna iterate, somehow. Yeah. It's interesting thing to think about. PhD D: Hmm. PhD G: It might be {disfmarker} Grad F: I mean you'd {disfmarker} you'd want models for spreading. PhD G: I was thinking it might be n PhD D: Of the f acoustic features? Grad F: Yeah. Professor C: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Well it might be neat to do some, phonetic, features on these, nonword words. Are {disfmarker} are these kinds of words that people never {disfmarker} the" huh" s and the" hmm" s and the" huh" {vocalsound} and the uh {disfmarker} These k No, I'm serious. There are all these kinds of {pause} functional, uh, elements. I don't know what you call {pause} them. But not just fill pauses but all kinds of ways of {pause} interrupting {comment} and so forth. Grad F: Uh - huh. PhD G: And some of them are, {vocalsound} yeah," uh - huh" s, and" hmm" s, and," hmm!" " hmm" {comment}" OK" ," uh" {comment} Grunts, uh, that might be interesting. Postdoc B: He's got lip {disfmarker} {pause} lipsmacks. PhD G: In the meetings. Professor C: We should move on. Postdoc B: Yeah. Professor C: Uh, new version of, uh, presegmentation? PhD A: Uh, oh yeah, um, {vocalsound} I worked a little bit on the {disfmarker} on the presegmentation to {disfmarker} to get another version which does channel - specific, uh, speech - nonspeech detection. And, what I did is I used some normalized features which, uh, look in into the {disfmarker} which is normalized energy, uh, energy normalized by the mean over the channels and by the, minimum over the, other. within each channel. And to {disfmarker} to, mm, to, yeah, to normalize also loudness and {disfmarker} and modified loudness and things and that those special features actually are in my feature vector. Grad F: Oh. PhD A: And, and, therefore to be able to, uh, somewhat distinguish between foreground and background speech in {disfmarker} in the different {disfmarker} in {disfmarker} each channel. And, eh, I tested it on {disfmarker} on three or four meetings and it seems to work, well yeah, fairly well, I {disfmarker} I would say. There are some problems with the lapel mike. Grad F: Of course. PhD A: Yeah. Uh, yeah. Grad F: Wow that's great. PhD A: And. Grad F: So I {disfmarker} I understand that's what you were saying about your problem with, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. And. Yeah, and {disfmarker} and I had {disfmarker} I had, uh, specific problems with. Grad F: I get it. So new use ninetieth quartile, rather than, minimum. PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: Wow. PhD A: Yeah {disfmarker} yeah, then {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I did some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} some things like that, Postdoc B: Interesting. PhD A: as there {disfmarker} there are some {disfmarker} some problems in, when, in the channel, there {disfmarker} they {disfmarker} the the speaker doesn't {disfmarker} doesn't talk much or doesn't talk at all. Then, the, yeah, there are {disfmarker} there are some problems with {disfmarker} with {disfmarker} with n with normalization, and, then, uh, there the system doesn't work at all. So, I'm {disfmarker} I'm glad that there is the {disfmarker} the digit part, where everybody is forced to say something, Professor C: Right. PhD A: so, that's {disfmarker} that's great for {disfmarker} for my purpose. And, the thing is I {disfmarker} I, then the evaluation of {disfmarker} of the system is a little bit hard, as I don't have any references. Grad F: Well we did the hand {disfmarker} the one by hand. PhD A: Yeah, that's the one {disfmarker} one wh where I do the training on so I can't do the evaluation on So the thing is, can the transcribers perhaps do some, some {disfmarker} some meetings in {disfmarker} in terms of speech - nonspeech in {disfmarker} in the specific channels? Grad F: Uh. Postdoc B: Well, I have {disfmarker} PhD D: Well won't you have that from their transcriptions? Postdoc B: Well, OK, so, now we need {disfmarker} Grad F: No, cuz we need is really tight. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: so, um, I think I might have done what you're requesting, though I did it in the service of a different thing. PhD A: Oh, great. Postdoc B: I have thirty minutes that I've more tightly transcribed with reference to individual channels. PhD A: OK. OK, that's great. That's great for me. Yeah, so. Postdoc B: And I could {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} Grad F: Hopefully that's not the same meeting that we did. Postdoc B: No, actually it's a different meeting. Grad F: Good. PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: So, um, e so the, you know, we have the, th they transcribe as if it's one channel with these {disfmarker} with the slashes to separate the overlapping parts. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then we run it through {disfmarker} then it {disfmarker} then I'm gonna edit it and I'm gonna run it through channelize which takes it into Dave Gelbart's form format. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And then you have, all these things split across according to channel, and then that means that, if a person contributed more than once in a given, overlap during that time bend that {disfmarker} that two parts of the utterance end up together, it's the same channel, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and then I took his tool, and last night for the first thirty minutes of one of these transcripts, I, tightened up the, um, boundaries on individual speakers'channels, PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: cuz his {disfmarker} his interface allows me to have total flexibility in the time tags across the channels. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And {pause} um, so. PhD A: so, yeah {disfmarker} yeah, that {disfmarker} that {disfmarker} that's great, but what would be nice to have some more meetings, not just one meeting to {disfmarker} to be sure that {disfmarker} that, there is a system, PhD D: So, current {disfmarker} This week. Postdoc B: Yes. Might not be what you need. Grad F: Yeah, so if we could get a couple meetings done with that level of precision I think that would be a good idea. PhD A: OK. Yeah. Postdoc B: Oh, OK. Uh, how {disfmarker} how m much time {disfmarker} so the meetings vary in length, what are we talking about in terms of the number of minutes you'd like to have as your {disfmarker} as your training set? PhD A: It seems to me that it would be good to have, a few minutes from {disfmarker} from different meetings, so. But I'm not sure about how much. Postdoc B: OK, now you're saying different meetings because of different speakers or because of different audio quality or both or {disfmarker}? PhD A: Both {disfmarker} both. Different {disfmarker} different number of speakers, different speakers, different {pause} conditions. Postdoc B: OK. Professor C: Yeah, we don't have that much variety in meetings yet, uh, I mean we have this meeting and the feature meeting and we have a couple others that we have uh, couple examples of. But {disfmarker} but, uh, PhD A: Yeah, m Yeah. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Grad E: Even probably with the gains {pause} differently will affect it, you mean {disfmarker} PhD A: Uh, not really as {disfmarker} Professor C: Poten - potentially. PhD A: uh, because of the normalization, yeah. Grad E: Oh, cuz you use the normalization? OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: Oh, OK. PhD G: We can try running {disfmarker} we haven't done this yet because, um, uh, Andreas an is {disfmarker} is gonna move over the SRI recognizer. i basically I ran out of machines at SRI, PhD A: OK. PhD G: cuz we're running the evals and I just don't have machine time there. But, once that's moved over, uh, hopefully in a {disfmarker} a couple days, then, we can take, um, what Jane just told us about as, the presegmented, {vocalsound} {nonvocalsound} the {disfmarker} the segmentations that you did, at level eight or som {comment} at some, threshold that Jane, tha {pause} right, and try doing, forced alignment. um, on the word strings. Grad F: Oh, shoot! PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: The pre presegment PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: yeah. PhD A: With the recognizer? Yeah. PhD G: And if it's good, then that will {disfmarker} that may give you a good boundary. Of course if it's good, we don't {disfmarker} then we're {disfmarker} we're fine, PhD A: Yeah. M PhD G: but, I don't know yet whether these, segments that contain a lot of pauses around the words, will work or not. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I would quite like to have some manually transcribed references for {disfmarker} for the system, as I'm not sure if {disfmarker} if it's really good to compare with {disfmarker} with some other automatic, found boundaries. PhD G: Yeah. Right. Postdoc B: Well, no, if we were to start with this and then tweak it h manually, would that {disfmarker} that would be OK? PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah {pause} sure. PhD G: They might be OK. Postdoc B: OK. PhD G: It {disfmarker} you know it really depends on a lot of things, PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: but, I would have maybe a transciber, uh, look at the result of a forced alignment and then adjust those. PhD A: Yeah. To a adjust them, or, yeah. Yeah, yeah. PhD G: That might save some time. PhD A: Yeah, great. PhD G: If they're horrible it won't help at all, but they might not be horrible. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: So {disfmarker} but I'll let you know when we, uh, have that. PhD A: OK, great. Postdoc B: How many minutes would you want from {disfmarker} I mean, we could {pause} easily, get a section, you know, like say a minute or so, from every meeting that we have so f from the newer ones that we're working on, everyone that we have. And then, should provide this. PhD A: If it's not the first minute of {disfmarker} of the meeting, that {disfmarker} that's OK with me, but, in {disfmarker} in the first minute, uh, Often there are some {disfmarker} some strange things going on which {disfmarker} which aren't really, well, for, which {disfmarker} which aren't re re really good. So. What {disfmarker} what I'd quite like, perhaps, is, to have, some five minutes of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of different meetings, so. Postdoc B: Somewhere not in the very beginning, five minutes, OK. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And, then I wanted to ask you just for my inter information, then, would you, be trai cuz I don't quite unders so, would you be training then, um, the segmenter so that, it could, on the basis of that, segment the rest of the meeting? So, if I give you like {pause} five minutes is the idea that this would then be applied to, uh, to, providing tighter time {pause} bands? PhD A: I {disfmarker} I could do a {disfmarker} a retraining with that, yeah. Postdoc B: Wow, interesting. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} but {disfmarker} but I hope that I {disfmarker} I don't need to do it. Postdoc B: OK. PhD A: So, uh it c can be do in an unsupervised way. Postdoc B: Uh - huh. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Excellent. Excellent, OK. PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, but, for {disfmarker} for {disfmarker} for those three meetings whi which I {disfmarker} which I did, it seems to be, quite well, but, there are some {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} as I said some problems with the lapel mike, but, perhaps we can do something with {disfmarker} with cross - correlations to, to get rid of the {disfmarker} of those. And. Yeah. That's {disfmarker} that's what I {disfmarker} that's my {pause} future work. Well {disfmarker} well what I want to do is to {disfmarker} to look into cross - correlations for {disfmarker} for removing those, false overlaps. Postdoc B: Wonderful. PhD G: Are the, um, wireless, different than the wired, mikes, at all? I mean, have you noticed any difference? PhD A: I'm {disfmarker} I'm not sure, um, if {disfmarker} if there are any wired mikes in those meetings, or, uh, I have {disfmarker} have to loo have a look at them but, I'm {disfmarker} I'm {disfmarker} I think there's no difference between, PhD G: So it's just the lapel versus everything else? PhD A: Yeah. Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so then, if that's five minutes per meeting we've got like twelve minutes, twelve meetings, roughly, that I'm {disfmarker} that I've been working with, then {disfmarker} Professor C: Of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} of the meetings that you're working with, how many of them are different, tha PhD A: No. Professor C: are there any of them that are different than, these two meetings? Postdoc B: Well {disfmarker} oh wa in terms of the speakers or the conditions or the? Professor C: Yeah, speakers. Sorry. PhD A: Yeah, that {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Um, we have different combinations of speakers. Professor C: So. Postdoc B: I mean, just from what I've seen, uh, there are some where, um, you're present or not present, and, then {disfmarker} then you have the difference between the networks group and this group PhD A: Yeah, I know, some of the NSA meetings, yeah. Professor C: Yeah. So I didn't know in the group you had if you had {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Professor C: so you have the networks meeting? PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yep, we do. Professor C: Do you have any of Jerry's meetings in your, pack, er, Postdoc B: Um, no. Professor C: No? Postdoc B: We could, I mean you {disfmarker} you recorded one last week or so. I could get that new one in this week {disfmarker} I get that new one in. Grad F: Yep. u PhD G: We're gonna be recording them every {pause} Monday, Professor C: Yeah. Cuz I think he really needs variety, PhD G: so {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Great. Professor C: and {disfmarker} and having as much variety for speaker certainly would be a big part of that I think. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: OK, so if I, OK, included {disfmarker} include, OK, then, uh, if I were to include all together samples from twelve meetings that would only take an hour and I could get the transcribers to do that right {disfmarker} I mean, what I mean is, that would be an hour sampled, and then they'd transcribe those {disfmarker} that hour, right? That's what I should do? Professor C: Yeah. And. PhD A: That's {disfmarker} that's. Postdoc B: I don't mean transcribe Professor C: Right. Ye - But you're {disfmarker} y Postdoc B: I mean {disfmarker} I mean adjust. So they get it into the multi - channel format and then adjust the timebands so it's precise. Professor C: So that should be faster than the ten times kind of thing, Postdoc B: Absolutely. I did {disfmarker} I did, um, uh, so, last night I did, uh, Professor C: yeah. Postdoc B: Oh gosh, well, last night, I did about half an hour in, three hours, which is not, terrific, Professor C: Yeah. Postdoc B: but, um, anyway, it's an hour and a half per {disfmarker} Professor C: Yeah. Well, that's probably. PhD A: So. Postdoc B: Well, I can't calculate on my, {vocalsound} on my feet. PhD A: Do the transcribers actually start wi with, uh, transcribing new meetings, or {pause} are they? Postdoc B: Well, um they're still working {disfmarker} they still have enough to finish that I haven't assigned a new meeting, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: but the next, m m I was about to need to assign a new meeting and I was going to take it from one of the new ones, PhD A: OK. Postdoc B: and I could easily give them Jerry Feldman's meeting, no problem. And, then {disfmarker} PhD A: OK. PhD G: So they're really running out of, data, prett I mean that's good. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. Uh, that first set. PhD G: Um, OK. Professor C: They're running out of data unless we s make the decision that we should go over and start, uh, transcribing the other set. PhD G: So {disfmarker} Professor C: There {disfmarker} the first {disfmarker} the first half. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: And so I was in the process of like editing them but this is wonderful news. PhD A: OK. Professor C: Alright. Postdoc B: We funded the experiment with, uh {disfmarker} also we were thinking maybe applying that that to getting the, Yeah, that'll be, very useful to getting the overlaps to be more precise all the way through. Professor C: So this, blends nicely into the update on transcripts. Postdoc B: Yes, it does. So, um, {comment} um, Liz, and {disfmarker} and Don, and I met this morning, in the BARCO room, with the lecture hall, Professor C: OK. PhD G: Yeah, please. Go ahead. And this afternoon. Postdoc B: and this afternoon, it drifted into the afternoon, {comment} {vocalsound} uh, concerning this issue of, um, the, well there's basically the issue of the interplay between the transcript format and the processing that, they need to do for, the SRI recognizer. And, um, well, so, I mentioned the process that I'm going through with the data, so, you know, I get the data back from the transcri Well, s uh, metaphorically, get the data back from the transcriber, and then I, check for simple things like spelling errors and things like that. And, um, I'm going to be doing a more thorough editing, with respect to consistency of the conventions. But they're {disfmarker} they're generally very good. And, then, I run it through, uh, the channelize program to get it into the multi - channel format, OK. And {pause} the, what we discussed this morning, I would summarize as saying that, um, these units that result, in a {disfmarker} a particular channel and a particular timeband, at {disfmarker} at that level, um, vary in length. And, um, {nonvocalsound} their recognizer would prefer that the units not be overly long. But it's really an empirical question, whether the units we get at this point through, just that process I described might be sufficient for them. So, as a first pass through, a first chance without having to do a lot of hand - editing, what we're gonna do, is, I'll run it through channelize, give them those data after I've done the editing process and be sure it's clean. And I can do that, pretty quickly, with just, that minimal editing, without having to hand - break things. Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: And then we'll see if the units that we're getting, uh, with the {disfmarker} at that level, are sufficient. And maybe they don't need to be further broken down. And if they do need to be further broken down then maybe it just be piece - wise, maybe it won't be the whole thing. So, that's {disfmarker} that's what we were discussing, this morning as far as I {disfmarker} Among {disfmarker} PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: also we discussed some adaptational things, PhD G: Then lots of {disfmarker} Postdoc B: so it's like, PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: uh {disfmarker} You know I hadn't, uh, incorporated, a convention explicitly to handle acronyms, for example, but if someone says, PZM it would be nice to have that be directly interpretable from, the transcript what they said, Professor C: Mm - hmm. Postdoc B: or Pi - uh Tcl {disfmarker} TCL I mean. It's like y it's {disfmarker} and so, um, I've {disfmarker} I've incorporated also convention, with that but that's easy to handle at the post editing phase, and I'll mention it to, transcribers for the next phase but that's OK. And then, a similar conv uh, convention for numbers. So if they say one - eighty - three versus one eight three. Um, and also I'll be, um, encoding, as I do my post - editing, the, things that are in curly brackets, which are clarificational material. And eh to incorporate, uh, keyword, at the beginning. So, it's gonna be either a gloss or it's gonna be a vocal sound like a, laugh or a cough, or, so forth. Or a non - vocal sound like a doors door - slam, and that can be easily done with a, you know, just a {disfmarker} one little additional thing in the, in the general format. PhD G: Yeah we j we just needed a way to, strip, you know, all the comments, all the things th the {disfmarker} that linguist wants but the recognizer can't do anything with. Um, but to keep things that we mapped to like reject models, or, you know, uh, mouth noise, or, cough. And then there's this interesting issue Jane brought up which I hadn't thought about before but I was, realizing as I went through the transcripts, that there are some noises like, um, well the {disfmarker} good example was an inbreath, where a transcriber working from, the mixed, signal, doesn't know whose breath it is, Grad F: Right. PhD G: and they've been assigning it to someone that may or may not be correct. And what we do is, if it's a breath sound, you know, a sound from the speaker, we map it, to, a noise model, like a mouth - noise model in the recognizer, and, yeah, it probably doesn't hurt that much once in a while to have these, but, if they're in the wrong channel, that's, not a good idea. And then there's also, things like door - slams that's really in no one's channel, they're like {disfmarker} it's in the room. PhD A: Yeah. Grad F: Right. PhD G: And {pause} uh, Jane had this nice, uh, idea of having, like an extra, uh couple tiers, Grad F: An extra channel. Postdoc B: Yeah. I've been {disfmarker} I've been adding that to the ones I've been editing. PhD G: yeah. And we were thinking, that is useful also when there's uncertainties. So if they hear a breath and they don't know who breath it is it's better to put it in that channel than to put it in the speaker's channel because maybe it was someone else's breath, or {disfmarker} Uh, so I think that's a good {disfmarker} you can always clean that up, post - processing. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So a lot of little details, but I think we're, coming to some kinda closure, on that. So the idea is then, uh, Don can take, uh, Jane's post - processed channelized version, and, with some scripts, you know, convert that to {disfmarker} to a reference for the recognizer and we can, can run these. So {pause} when that's, ready {disfmarker} you know, as soon as that's ready, and as soon as the recognizer is here we can get, twelve hours of force - aligned and recognized data. And, you know, start, working on it, Postdoc B: And {disfmarker} PhD G: so we're, I dunno a coup a week or two away I would say from, uh, if {disfmarker} if that process is automatic once we get your post - process, transcript. Postdoc B: Mm - hmm. And that doesn't {disfmarker} the amount of editing that it would require is not very much either. I'm just hoping that the units that are provided in that way, {nonvocalsound} will be sufficient cuz I would save a lot of, uh, time, dividing things. PhD G: Yeah, some of them are quite long. Just from {disfmarker} I dunno how long were {disfmarker} you did one? Grad E: I saw a couple, {vocalsound} around twenty seconds, and that was just without looking too hard for it, so, I would imagine that there might be some that are longer. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Well n One question, e w would that be a single speaker or is that multiple speakers overlapping? Grad E: No. No, but if we're gonna segment it, like if there's one speaker in there, that says" OK" or something, right in the middle, it's gonna have a lot of dead time around it, PhD G: Right. It's not the {disfmarker} it's not the fact that we can't process a twenty second segment, it's the fact that, there's twenty seconds in which to place one word in the wrong place Grad E: so it's not {disfmarker} Postdoc B: Yeah. Grad E: Yeah. PhD G: You know, if {disfmarker} if someone has a very short utterance there, and that's where, we, might wanna have this individual, you know, ha have your pre pre - process input. PhD A: Yep. Yeah. Sure. Postdoc B: That's very important. PhD A: I {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I thought that perhaps the transcribers could start then from the {disfmarker} those mult multi - channel, uh, speech - nonspeech detections, if they would like to. PhD G: And I just don't know, I have to run it. Postdoc B: In {disfmarker} in doing the hand - marking? PhD G: Right. PhD A: Yeah. Postdoc B: Yeah that's what I was thinking, too. PhD G: Right. Postdoc B: Yeah. PhD G: So that's probably what will happen, but we'll try it this way and see. PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: I mean it's probably good enough for force - alignment. If it's not then we're really {disfmarker} then we def definitely PhD A: Yeah. PhD G: uh, but for free recognition I'm {disfmarker} it'll probably not be good enough. We'll probably get lots of errors because of the cross - talk, and, noises and things. PhD A: Yep. Professor C: Good s I think that's probably our agenda, or starting up there. Postdoc B: Oh I wanted to ask one thing, the microphones {disfmarker} the new microphones, Professor C: Yeah? K. Postdoc B: when do we get, uh? Grad F: Uh, they said it would take about a week. Postdoc B: Oh, exciting. K. K. Professor C: K. PhD D: You ordered them already? Grad F: Mm - hmm. PhD D: Great. PhD G: So what happens to our old microphones? Professor C: They go where old microphones go. Grad F: Um {disfmarker} PhD G: Do we give them to someone, or {disfmarker}? Grad F: Well the only thing we're gonna have extra, for now, PhD G: We don't have more receivers, we just have {disfmarker} Grad F: Right, we don so the only thing we'll have extra now is just the lapel. PhD G: Right. Grad F: Not {disfmarker} not the, bodypack, just the lapel. PhD G: Just the lapel itself. Grad F: Um, and then one of the {disfmarker} one of those. Since, what I decided to do, on Morgan's suggestion, was just get two, new microphones, um, and try them out. And then, if we like them we'll get more. PhD G: Mm - hmm. Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: OK. Grad F: Since they're {disfmarker} they're like two hundred bucks a piece, we won't, uh, at least try them out. PhD D: So it's a replacement for this headset mike? Grad F: Yep. Yep. Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: And they're gonna do the wiring for us. PhD D: What's the, um, style of the headset? Grad F: It's, um, it's by Crown, and it's one of these sort of mount around the ear thingies, and, uh, when I s when I mentioned that we thought it was uncomfortable he said it was a common problem with the Sony. And this is how apparently a lot of people are getting around it. PhD D: Hmm. Grad F: And I checked on the web, and every site I went to, raved about this particular mike. It's apparently comfortable and stays on the head well, so we'll see if it's any good. But, uh, I think it's promising. Postdoc B: You said it was used by aerobics instructors? Grad F: Yep. Yep, so it was {disfmarker} it was advertised for performers Postdoc B: That says a lot. Grad E: Hmm. Professor C: For the recor for the record Adam is not a paid employee or a consultant of Crown. Grad F: and {disfmarker} Excuse me? Postdoc B: Oh. Professor C: I said" For the record Adam is {disfmarker} is not a paid consultant or employee of Crown" . Grad F: Excuse me? PhD G: Right. Grad F: That's right. PhD G: However, he may be solicited after these meetings are distributed. Grad F: Well we're using the Crown P Z Professor C: Yeah. PhD G: Don't worry about finishing your dissertation. Grad F: These are Crown aren't they? Professor C: Right. Grad F: The P Z Ms are Crown, aren't they? Professor C: Yeah. Grad F: Yeah, I thought they were. Professor C: You bet. You bet. Grad F: And they work very well. PhD G: Yes. Professor C: So if we go to a workshop about all this {disfmarker} this it's gonna be a meeting about meetings about meetings. OK. So. Grad F: And then it {disfmarker} we have to go to the planning session for that workshop. Professor C: Oh, yeah, what {disfmarker} Which'll be the meeting about the meeting about the meeting. PhD D: Oh, god. Grad F: Cuz then it would be a meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meetings. Postdoc B: Professor C: Yeah? Just start saying" M four" . Yeah, OK. Grad F: Yeah. M to the fourth. Professor C: Should we do the digits? Grad F: Yep, go for it. Professor C: OK. PhD A: S {pause} s Grad F: Pause between the lines, remember? Grad E: Excuse me. Grad F: OK. Professor C: OK. PhD G: Huh.

The group discussed the collection status for a set of connected digits recordings that are nearly complete and ready to be trained on a recognizer. Anticipated results were discussed in reference to results obtained for other digits corpora, i. e. Aurora and TI-digits. The group also considered the prospect of performing fine-grained acoustic-phonetic analyses on a subset of Meeting Recorder digits or Switchboard data. Pre-segmentation manipulations that allow for the segmentation of channel-specific speech/non-speech portions of the signal and the distinction of foreground versus background speech were discussed. Finally, speaker fe008 and fe016 reported on new efforts to adapt transcriptions to the needs of the SRI recognizer, including conventions for encoding acronyms, numbers, ambient noise, and unidentified inbreaths.

tr-sq-94

tr-sq-94_0

What did the group discuss about speech recognition command? Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

The group decided that the feature of speech recognition should be included to the remote control, even though it would exceed the cost constraint set by the management. Marketing believed that it is worth taking a risk because speech recognition is new to the market and customers would be willing to pay extra for this trendy function. What's more, Project Manager agreed to coordinate with some technical companies if Industrial Designer ever needed any technological backup.

tr-sq-95

tr-sq-95_0

Why did Marketing think highly of speech recognition command? Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

Marketing believed this feature would improve the market competitiveness of this product based on a conducted survey on user requirement. One the one hand, 80% of the 15-35 year-old group are willing to spend more money for trendy new products. 75% - 90% of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote even though it is of higher price. On the other hand, half of the users said the remote control got lost easily and most of the time were hard to find. With speech recognition, however, this problem could be solved.

tr-sq-96

tr-sq-96_0

What did User Interface think about the speech recognition command? Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

User Interface found this feature great, but he noticed that the ambient sound coming from television would confuse the speech recognition and might accidentally trigger the remote control. User Interface pointed out that Industrial Designer had to make sure the speech recognizer would be good enough to filter out the television speech and recognize only the user's voice. He believed that this feature, once successfully achieved, would make the product popular on the market.

tr-sq-97

tr-sq-97_0

Summarize the discussion about functional design of the product features. Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

Industrial Designer suggested that the remote control needed to be able to turn the television on and off, control the volume and the menu, change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. As for the material used for the construction of the outer case, it needed to be not only flexible and inflatable, but also waterproof. The product itself would be better if it could change in size depending on user preference. In addition, the remote control should be able to respond to the user by sending out an oral cue in order to show that it understood your message correctly.

tr-sq-98

tr-sq-98_0

What features did User Interface think the remote control should have for its buttons? Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

Based on user perspective feedback, User Interface pointed out that the buttons on remote controls are generally too many and too small. Even though they were sometimes labeled, it was still not clear for the users to tell what each button was supposed to do. Given this, User Interface preferred to keep the number of buttons to a minimum and make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed. He believed a simpler design would make the product less imposing.

tr-sq-99

tr-sq-99_0

What features did Project Manager recommend to be incorporated in the new remote control? Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

Given the fact that for families with children, remote controls were always played or even thrown by kids, Project Manager would prefer the material used in the construction of the product, especially on the outside, to be unbreakable. Project Manager also suggested that the product should be slim and simple. On top of that, it would be better if the remote control could be universal to use for any kind of television.

tr-gq-100

tr-gq-100_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: Okay uh Agnes, you can help me for the slide when {gap} User Interface: Yep. Sure. Project Manager: okay. Okay, welcome back. I hope uh you have a fresh head and a fresh time. How t now the meeting actually we gathering here to discuss about the functional design meeting. Okay, and uh we'll issue some information from uh all of you. And it's in the, I think uh, in the sharing folder. And uh I will invite uh the Christine and the Ed and uh Agnes to discuss about on the various subjects. So can you go to the next slide? Yeah uh the agenda of the meeting is opening. Then uh I'm going to talk about uh the project management, what I'm going to do, and uh, of course, I'm doing the project management and secretary both, okay, to take the minutes of the meeting. And there are three presentations. One is uh new project requirements. And the second one about uh decision on remote control functions. And uh finally we are closing. Uh and the meeting time will be uh forty minutes, so you have to be very quick. And I have come up with the {disfmarker} management come with the new proposal, okay, and I have to discuss a few points on this. Uh both says new insights in the aim of your project. Uh the one is uh the teletext becomes uh outmoded, okay because if uh because of the computer systems and the new technology. So we don't need to consider really about the teletext all in our new project design. And the second one is about uh the remote control. Should be used only for the T_V_. That's what our uh management says. And the third point, it's very very important to establish our uh marketing or uh corporate image, okay, with this new project or new product. Okay. {vocalsound} So I will invite uh {disfmarker} Agnes, can you go to the third slide? User Interface: No, this is the third slide. Project Manager: Okay, {gap}. So, I'll invite uh Christine to discuss about uh the functional design. Industrial Designer:'Kay, do you wanna open the {disfmarker} User Interface: Sure. Um. You're participant s Industrial Designer: I'm number two. User Interface: Two? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: That's it. User Interface: Do you want the mouse, or do you want me to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I'll do the notes. Yeah, thanks. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So um well I I figured uh we should um identify some user requirements, and from my experience, I wanna uh, and from {vocalsound} research I did, uh the the device has to turn the television on and off the first time you press on the big button, you can't uh can't have like uh waffling on this point, you know. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Really have {disfmarker} It needs to be able y y have to be able to find it. Because one of the biggest problems with remote controls is finding them. So uh, I also, since we have to establish our corporate image on the basis of this new product, thought we better look at things that are popular and um ex go beyond those, and, as I said in the first meeting, um {vocalsound} and then uh we might wanna talk eventually about the materials that are appropriate to use in uh in the construction, especially in the the uh the outside of the product Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: so that it gives the appearance, and it is reliable, and so forth. {vocalsound} I did a little history on uh the the uh remote controls and when they were invented and so forth, so, I guess this guy Zenith uh created the Flashmatic, which I kinda like the idea,'cause it made me think of um um maybe the remote control made a big flash when uh you turn the T_V_ on and off, that might be interesting. And um {vocalsound} so it was highly directional flash light that uh you could turn the picture on and off, and the sound on and off, and change channels c so I think um those are still requirements we have today, uh fifty years later. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: And uh it was really a pioneering innovation, but it was uh sensitive to the sun, so that uh it would get {disfmarker} would start off by the {disfmarker} you'd get {disfmarker} it would easily cause um problems. So, uh I {disfmarker} in addition to uh looking at the um {vocalsound} uh the functional requir so all these devices are examples of where uh mm {disfmarker} they {vocalsound} represent examples that are available today {vocalsound} {vocalsound} which I think the one in the middle is r um really uh something to keep in mind. Marketing: Fantastic. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It'd be easy to find. And um it would uh y you'd {vocalsound} {disfmarker} you could throw it at things if if the T_V_ didn't turn on and off, you could use it for something else. And since I'm not really um {vocalsound} Industrial Designer, I didn't really know what to do with this slide. But um {vocalsound} I just {vocalsound} took some {vocalsound} different uh schematics and I put them into this, and I guess this is what a slide might look like if you were drawing a circuit board. {gap} I don't know why um we were asked to do this. So, uh {vocalsound} personal preferences, {vocalsound} um User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: I think we could uh I I'm really thinking outside the box here, and I think that we should consider perhaps having an an an a a size uh {vocalsound} {disfmarker} a remote control that changes in size depending on the user preference. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: So something that's very very flexible and inflatable and then you could shrink it. I think um it could either be {disfmarker} you could go either one extreme, be very colourful, or you could make it clear, and um kind of blend in with things, so you didn't have to um {vocalsound} uh have a problem with the th the decoration of the {disfmarker} of the user's home. Um I think uh it needs to be waterproof, because uh sometimes they fall into cups Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and, you know, it might be out by the swimming pool or something like that. Um {vocalsound} if you uh mi one of {disfmarker} one of my requirements was about needs t to tell you when it's done its job or not, because half the time, I keep pushing on the remote control, and I don't know if it's actually understood my message, so I think it should give you some sort of an oral cue. And uh, course I never wanna replace the battery. {vocalsound} So, Marketing: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: that's {disfmarker} those are my f preferences, and that's my presentation. Project Manager: Yeah, let me uh interrupt you uh if you can add other facility, other feature, like uh unbreakable. Industrial Designer: Yes. Project Manager: Okay, because uh especially today, you know, you have the family and the kids, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay, and the kids throw it and they they play with their remotes and {gap}. Industrial Designer: Run over it with a car. Project Manager: Yes. Okay, so if you can add the feature, okay, for your uh fabric whatever in your outline design okay, with unbreakable, okay, I think that will give a lot of advantage for our product, if I'm not wrong. Maybe you can uh add it in that. Industrial Designer: Good idea. Good idea, I'll I'll uh um {disfmarker} Yes, very good. Project Manager: Okay, uh thank you Christine, and uh uh any questions or uh clarifications, or any discussion on the functional design? User Interface: Do you have any preconceived ideas in terms of materials?'Cause, for example, in the unbreakable thing, doing something plastic would be harder, Industrial Designer: Hmm. User Interface: whereas having something like, I dunno, steel or titanium isn't really economically viable. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Titanium. Titanium would be {vocalsound} be heavy, too, Marketing: Titanium. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: wouldn't it? User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: No, I haven't really um {disfmarker} I wanted feedback, I think we need to rate {disfmarker} rank these, but we'll see what your uh personal preferences are and your thoughts. User Interface: Yeah. Sure, yeah. No, I just wondering whether {disfmarker} that you had any sort of {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} I like titanium. It's light. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Uh {vocalsound} yeah Marketing: Expensive. User Interface: {vocalsound} The marketing comes out. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: but uh who who said {disfmarker} who said we were, Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes. Industrial Designer: you know, nobody told me how mu what our financial objective is, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah so {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: It'd be hard to inflate something ou made out of titanium though {vocalsound}. Project Manager: Yeah the the {disfmarker} I'm sorry because uh the last meeting we supposed to discuss about the financial thing. User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh let me go quickly, maybe if I can go back {vocalsound}. I know the project plan and the budget. So I can close this, {gap} not sure. Was in uh {disfmarker} S This. So let me see where is this file. User Interface: That's Christine's. Project Manager: This is Christine. {vocalsound} User Interface: And that's mine, I think. Project Manager: That's yours, okay. Saving. Marketing: {vocalsound} {gap} User Interface: In modified. Marketing: I don't know, Project Manager: Okay, uh Marketing: I think verbally we can {disfmarker} we can pretty much sell. Project Manager: I will {disfmarker} I will send you a mail, okay? The project may be the the project aim, okay. At the end of the day, the company uh wants to make at least uh the fifty million Euro. Okay, and uh of course the price will be very reasonable on the the sales side. Okay, that maybe Eddie will talk to you about uh how much uh the price and uh what's uh {disfmarker} how much its cost for the manufacturing and how much it's going to be {disfmarker} we sell in the market. Okay. Then uh you can come back with your feedback. And I I have one {disfmarker} maybe the suggestion or opinion. This remote control, okay, it can be for like universal, to use for any T_V_. Okay, and it will be slim, okay, and uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Not fat? Project Manager: Not fat. Industrial Designer: Not fat, huh. Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Might be hard to find, though. Project Manager: Yep. But let's try it, okay, with the different uh {disfmarker} the designs, okay, the functional designs. Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh, okay. Project Manager: Okay? So any other questions? Marketing: Uh from her side, I don't think uh there's too many more questions. Project Manager: Okay. Thank you Christine for uh time being, Marketing: If you can come to the {disfmarker} Project Manager: so then uh Ed, so can you tell about {disfmarker} Marketing: Okay, from the marketing {disfmarker} yeah, from the marketing side, just to to give an idea what the management is looking for, I was looking for a a remote control to have a s User Interface: S'scuse me for one sec. Marketing: I have a sales price of twenty-five Euro, with a production price of uh twelve and a half Euro. For what uh I think from what we're trying to find, we're tr we're looking for, I don't think that price is exactly in the market. Okay? Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I'll explain myself here now in the sense that uh in a {disfmarker} in the recent surveys, uh from the ages {disfmarker} fr from fifteen to thirty-five, eighty percent are willing to spend more money for something as fancy as trendy. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Twenty-five Euros, uh that's that's a preson reasonable price. That's a market price right now. Now if we're gonna take a risk, and push this up a bit, make it more expensive, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: but give them added things that they don't have now, Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: then it w it could possibly sell. Obviously the risk is there. Too expensive, they're not gonna buy. But, I think uh there's one other thing interesting {disfmarker} two things that are interesting {gap} is that uh from the fifteen to thirty-five year-old group, which always spends more money on trendy new things, speech recognition is requested. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Speech recognition? . Marketing: And we're talking between seventy-five to ninety percent of this group is willing to pay for speech recognition on a remote. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Obviously, we can't make a remote into a computer, but maybe simple commands. I dunno, louder, softer, on, off. That might be a possibility, even though it costs more, to be the first on the market to produce this. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Thirty-five percent say they're too difficult to use. So we have to figure out a way of making it um more user friendly. {vocalsound} Uh fifty percent say they can't find the remote half the time. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So maybe one word speech recognition commands, say remote, and there's a beep beep beep, and they can find it through, you know, ten tons of newspapers, magazines, whatever you have at home. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, in the cost that uh the management is looking for, that's not gonna be possible. But if it's trendy, if it's fancy, it's got some colour to it, if it's very easy {disfmarker} easy to use, if it's got simple remote {disfmarker} speech remote uh control, like I said, louder, softer, change channel, on, off, remote, it goes beep beep, I can find my my remote without spending half a day looking for it and getting all upset'cause I can't turn the T_V_ on. So we're gonna have to look at it in a {vocalsound} in this global idea, with the ideas of the industrial uh design. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: But, price obviously we have to talk about. Project Manager: Yep. So what do you think about uh the design {gap}? Do you think you can make it or uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: D uh I'm sorry? {vocalsound} Project Manager: What do you think about uh the design, uh what he was talking about {disfmarker} of the speech recognition? Marketing: Speech recognition. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Well, uh training is always an issue with uh commands. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So um {disfmarker} might uh {disfmarker} we can perhaps um {vocalsound} do it if the user is willing to spend some time in the training process, uh it could reduce th th uh the overall um cost. Not sure how. {vocalsound} But um anyway, um {vocalsound} I I think also that uh this might impact the battery life. And um so, maybe what we'll have to do is um add something where you can um recharge it wirelessly so that uh {vocalsound} y you know sen send power to it. So uh or maybe uh set it out in the sun and it uh, you know, gets uh, from the light, um a a solar cell inside there User Interface: Hmm. Industrial Designer: so that uh you have enough uh juice to do all these fancy things. User Interface: It seems also like with the speech recognition, yeah, it's a great feature, but if you're watching T_V_, there's a lot of ambient sound, and it's words. It's not just, you know, noises like something hitting. It's actual speech, so then you have to make sure that the speech recognizer is good enough to filter out the T_V_ speech, and the the user's speech. Otherwise, you can say remote. Industrial Designer: Off. {vocalsound} User Interface: But if someone on the screen is saying the same thing, all of a sudden, you have someone in a movie saying off and your screen dies, because they've triggered the remote control and it's turned off your T_V_. {vocalsound} So, I think if we can find a speech recognizer that can handle those types of problems, then yeah, it'd be a really good marketing gimmick. Marketing: Mm. User Interface: But, I think we seriously need to consider how that would impact the situation. Industrial Designer: Very good point. Marketing: Because tha w {vocalsound} with speech recognition uh th I'm not that good at that idea User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: but th {vocalsound} if it's a one-word recognition,'cause I know with telephones and cars and things I've seen in the States, User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {gap} a friend of mine says call Mom, and it calls up Mom. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing:'Kay the radio can be on and everything. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: Because I think s with speech recognition, if uh the the remote or like the telephone {vocalsound} {disfmarker} it has a exact word that it has to hear. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: I don't think it would come through a sentence in a television. If somebody's speaking on the se the television, they're not gonna stop and say remote, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: okay. So I think that uh something could be designed to recognise single word {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh yeah. Yeah. No, I think it's a great idea if we can design it to to suit those requirements. Marketing: Like the t like the telephone. No because I {gap} this is this is years ago in the United States where we're driving down and he said call home, and the telephone called immediately {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah. {vocalsound} Marketing: so well, that's kinda cute. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well, what I can uh suggest to you, Christine, okay, uh if you need some uh {disfmarker} the technical feedback, or some training, okay, about uh this facility, especially for the speech recognition, I can recommend you some companies like uh Intel or I_B_M_, okay, because they're already in this uh speech recognition part, okay. And uh you can maybe have some uh technical backup from them, some kind of a technical tie-up. Okay, and uh if you want, I can coordinate, okay, to get some information, okay, and uh you can uh let me know, okay, so what kind of uh the details you require okay, to add this feature in this project. I don't think it's uh the difficult. And uh we need to know how much is the timeframe you need to develop, apart from uh what {gap} today. Industrial Designer: Okay, we'll find that out. Project Manager: Yep. Marketing: From from your side uh, you're gonna have to go back the management and s be more s precise. Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: What do they want? Project Manager: Yes. Marketing: Uh {vocalsound}, a risk, take a risk on the market? Something that's gonna cost more, but could very easily s make a boom in the market? Project Manager: Yes. Yep. Marketing: Because it has to be something totally different, has to be total totally new. Something that nobody has right now. Project Manager: Yeah but Marketing: And it's gonna cost. Project Manager: but end of the day, you're the sales guy, so I will come back and sit on your head because uh you are going to give your sales projection, Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. It's uh of course it's uh good to uh tell the management how much it's cost us Marketing: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: and how much you are going to benefit, Marketing: Sure. Sure. Project Manager: okay. And uh, so I don't mind to convince, okay, the management to spend some more money on the project, okay, if you can make out of Marketing: Obviously. Project Manager: the money from this project. Marketing: If the bottom line is positive. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yes, okay I don't mind to convince the the management, User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: okay. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: The management says, okay, so they they don't want certain facilities, which it's already worked, okay, they want something uh new, okay. I think uh like uh speech recognit definitely they will agree, I don't think they'll say no for that, okay. And uh I hope I can convince the management on that, okay. So if you have any uh new ideas, okay, for uh your {disfmarker} you can always come up and uh you can tell me if you need any uh s special, okay, coordination, okay, between any uh technical companies, which you can uh hide their technology backup, okay, for your uh functional design or technical design, okay, then I am ready to do that. And uh what's your comments about uh {disfmarker} User Interface: Um well, I mean, maybe if I go through my presentation, you can sort of see what the user perspective is, and how it ties into the other two comments. Marketing: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, so you are finish, Ed, uh so I can uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Yes. Mm. Project Manager: Okay, I'll uh hand over to Agnes. Just gonna close this. T Uh where are you, here? User Interface: Mm participant three. Project Manager: Participant three. User Interface: Nope, here {gap} Project Manager: Okay, so I'll {disfmarker} yep. Okay. User Interface: Good. Project Manager: Is it okay? User Interface: Thanks. Project Manager: Alri User Interface: Yeah, and that's fine. Okay. So, basically, the method that we usually use in the user interface design is that we need to look at what people like and what people don't like about existing products. So, in our case, existing remote controls. And then, what the good ideas are, and what the bad ideas are, and why they're bad and good, which isn't always as obvious. We seem to have intuitions about why things are good or things are bad, but when you look, technically, at how it works, sometimes that's not the case. Then we need to decide what functionalities we really want to keep,'cause that'll feed into both Ed's work and Christine's work. Um and then what the remote control should look like, obviously, once we've got a good idea of what the functionalities are. So, in terms of the functionalities that we need, you obviously need to be able to turn the T_V_ on and off. You need to change channels, both by directly going to a specific channel or by channel surfing. You need to be able to control the volume and then control any menus on the T_V_ to regulate contrast or whatever. So, the problems that people have expressed is that there's too many buttons on remote controls, in general. The buttons {disfmarker} it's not clear what they're supposed to do. Um often, you need to know specific button sequences {vocalsound} to get certain functionalities done, um which you don't necessarily always remember, especially if it's a functionality that you don't use very often. And that the buttons are too small. So, here we've got two examples where here on the left-hand side, you can see a remote control that has lots and lots of buttons. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: The buttons, in a lot of cases, are tiny. Um they're hard to see, and okay, they're labelled, but the labels don't necessarily tell you too much. Whereas, on the other side, you have a much simpler remote control that I think basically has the minimum functionalities {vocalsound} that are needed. And it sort of looks simpler and just less imposing when you first look at it. So, I would be inclined to go sort of towards this, in terms of design, rather than this. And if there's specific functionalities that require more buttons, then we can figure out how to do it with existing um buttons. So my personal preferences are to keep the number of buttons to a limit, or to a minimum, sorry, make frequently used buttons bigger and more strategically placed, so like the on button being really obvious one, the channel changing and the volume, and to keep the design basically sleek and simple. Project Manager: Click mm. User Interface: Which, I think ties into what Christine and Ed have both said fairly reasonably. Um so, that's pretty much it, an I don't know if you guys have any questions or {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Oh, it's um, seems {vocalsound} very understandable. Clearly your research and uh {disfmarker} and ours uh heading in the same direction, User Interface: Yep. Industrial Designer: and um uh the only thing that I saw missing from uh your your research that we found was this uh ability to find the doggone thing when you need it. Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: Yes, that's true. Yeah. Industrial Designer: So uh, you know, but that's okay. That's why we're all here at the table, so that if we think of it and our research indicates certain things and um w we it's complementary. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: I also think that um uh th f the the feel of it is uh, when you hold it, is something that um uh was expressed more in in in in my uh design User Interface: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Industrial Designer: and that's logical and normal'cause those are the parameters that an Industrial Designer's more thinking about, th th the look and the feel, User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and uh, you're {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh, that's definitely a very important factor, especially to users who are gonna be buying the thing and then using it almost on an {disfmarker} daily basis in a lot of cases, I think. Industrial Designer: First. Yep. Mm-hmm. {vocalsound} Okay, so I don't have any questions. Sounds good. Project Manager: So {vocalsound} for anybody need uh any help, for time being, on this uh subjects, okay, so please come back to me, User Interface: Oh {disfmarker} Project Manager: and uh Christine, maybe I can uh try to help you to get some uh the technical uh the companies to help you for uh make a design uh slim, okay, and to add some features, like we are talking about, the speech recognition and all. User Interface: Should we maybe make a decision about what features we actually want to include, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface:'cause we've thrown a lot of features onto the table, but do we actually want to incorporate all of them, or have we missed anything? Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: Do you wanna go back and look at the closing slide, maybe that would provide some guidance? User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: Doesn't really tell us. Project Manager: So not really this one we are talk ab Marketing: Individual actions. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well it says individual actions, Project Manager: Yep. Industrial Designer: it says user interf so I'm supposed to do the components concept, supposed to work on the user interface concept, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and you're supposed to keep watching the trends. Um and specific instructions will be sent by our our coach. I think we should {vocalsound} do as many features as uh {disfmarker} start with all of them right now User Interface: I thought {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: and eliminate them later in the process, that's my suggestion. Project Manager: Okay, that will be great. {vocalsound} And uh I'll send you the the minutes of meet Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} You can object if you want to {vocalsound} User Interface: No, I I'm just thinking in terms of time, Marketing: {vocalsound} She's objecting. {vocalsound} User Interface: like if {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Yes, now I'm objecting. No, I mean, I was just thinking is it really practical to start designing something with features that we're just gonna end up throwing away? I mean, it takes a lot of time and effort for everyone to consider different features, um and s if we spend that time and effort on features that we're not gonna use, maybe it's better to spend it on the f thinking more about features that we actually do want, but {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I think we should take that as an action item for after the meeting, Marketing: Oh th {vocalsound} we s we still have {disfmarker} User Interface: guess {disfmarker} Industrial Designer:'cause w our meeting time has run out. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Somebody else has go to use this room, Marketing: Right. User Interface: Sure. Industrial Designer: and, you know, we can't hang out here User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: and talk about this, so {disfmarker} User Interface: Yeah. Sure. Project Manager: Okay, what we'll do is now we'll take for lunch break, okay, then uh we can discuss furthermore, okay, with our areas, and uh then we will come back again in the {disfmarker} in the next meeting. So thanks for coming and uh I'll send you minutes of meeting, and uh please put your all information in the sharing folder so everybody can share the information. Okay? User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So let's go for lunch then. Thank you. Industrial Designer: Thank you very much. Marketing: Agreed. {vocalsound}

This is the second meet-up for the new product of television remote control, with a particular focus on its functional design. Industrial Designer, Marketing and User Interface were each invited to give a presentation on the subject that they are in charge of. On the basis of conducted user requirement survey, Industrial Designer and User Interface put forward their ideas on remote control features which are new to the existing market, along with the functionality and outlook of the product. Among all the features, speech recognition command takes up the majority of discussed subjects. The group also discussed the material appropriate to use in the construction. After the group determined the financial target of this project, as well as the production price and reasonable selling price, Marketing suggested taking a risk in price rise.